Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Krupić, D.; Gračanin, A.; Corr, P. J. (2016)
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: BF
The nature of approach motivation has not yet been adequately defined. Some authors view it as a unidimensional construct, while others consider it to be multidimensional. Its psychometric nature is explored in this study, which tests empirically the motivational account of the Behavioural Approach System (BAS) within an evolutionary context. In a sample of 394 participants, we administered the Assessment of Individual Motives questionnaire (AIM-Q), the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory Personality Questionnaire (RST-PQ) and a short version of the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward (SPSRQ-20). The results of set correlation analysis indicated that different BAS scales relate to different motives, thus supporting the multidimensional perspective on approach motivation. Specifically, Reward Interest relates to various types of motives that generally reflect sensitivity to social rewards; Goal-Drive Persistence relates to social exchange, Reward Reactivity to safety and commitment; while Impulsivity and Sensitivity to Reward (SR) relate to competitive motives. These results are discussed within an evolutionary framework for the multidimensionality of the BAS.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 2. Materials and Methods
    • 2.1. Participants and procedure A total of 394 (208 male and 186 female) participants (MAGE = 27.99; SD = 9.70,
    • range from 16 to 54) completed three questionnaires online using LimeSurvey web
    • 2.2. Measures We administered two RST questionnaires: Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory
    • Personality Questionnaire (RST-PQ; Corr & Cooper, 2016), and the Sensitivity to
    • Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire-20 (SPSRQ-20; Aluja & Blanch,
    • 2011; Torrubia, Avila, Molto, & Caseras, 2001). We also administered the Assessment of
    • Alvergne, A., Jokela, M., Faurie, C., & Lummaa, V. (2010). Personality and testosterone in men from a high-fertility population. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 840- 844. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.006
    • Archer, J. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evaluation of the challenge hypothesis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 30, 319-345. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.12.007
    • Barclay, P. (2013). Strategies for cooperation in biological markets, especially for humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 34, 164-175. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.02.002
    • Beaver, B., & Amoss jr, M. (1982). Aggressive behavior associated with naturally elevated serum testosterone in mares. Applied Animal Ethology, 8, 425-428.
    • Bernard, L. C. (2010). Motivation and personality: Relationships between putative motive dimensions and the five factor model of personality. Psychological Reports, 106, 613- 631. doi:10.2466/PR0.106.2.613-631
    • Bernard, L. C. (2013). Manual for the Assessment of Individual Motives-Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, CA.
    • Bernard, L. C., & Lac, A. (2014). The incremental validity of motive" traits of action: Predicting behavior longitudinally. Individual Differences Research, 12, 79-100.
    • Bernard, L. C., Mills, M., Swenson, L., & Walsh, R. P. (2005). An evolutionary theory of human motivation. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 131, 129- 184. doi:10.3200/MONO.131.2.129-184
    • Berridge, K. C. (2004). Motivation concepts in behavioral neuroscience. Physiology and Behavior, 81, 179-209. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2004.02.004
    • Berridge, K. C. (2012). From prediction error to incentive salience: Mesolimbic computation of reward motivation. European Journal of Neuroscience, 35, 1124- 1143. doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.07990.x
    • Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (2003). Parsing reward. Trends in Neurosciences, 26, 507-513. doi:10.1016/S0166-2236(03)00233-9
    • Brosnan, S. F., Salwiczek, L., & Bshary, R. (2010). The interplay of cognition and cooperation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 365(1553), 2699-2710. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0154
    • Buss, D. M. (1999). Evolutionary psychology. London: Allyn and Bacon.
    • Buss, D. M. (2008). Human nature and individual differences: Evolution of human personality. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality theory and research (pp. 29-60) (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
    • Buss, D. M. (2009). How can evolutionary psychology successfully explain personality and individual differences? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 359-366. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01138.x
    • Coe, C. L., Mendoza, S. P., & Levine, S. (1979). Social status constrains the stress response in the squirrel monkey. Physiology and Behavior, 23, 633-638. doi:10.1016/0031-9384(79)90151-3
    • Cohen, J., Cohen, P., Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioural sciences (3rd ed.). London: Erlbaum.
    • Corr, P. J. (2008). Reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST): Introduction. In P. J. Corr (Ed.), The reinforcement sensitivity theory and personality (pp. 155-187). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Corr, P. J., & Cooper, A. (2016). The Corr-Cooper Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory Personality Questionnaire (RST-PQ): Development and validation. Psychological Assessment, in press. doi.10.1037/pas0000273
    • Dalley, J. W., & Roiser, J. P. (2012). Dopamine, serotonin and impulsivity. Neuroscience, 215, 42-58 doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2012.03.065
    • Izuma, K., Saito, D. N., & Sadato, N. (2010). Processing of the incentive for social approval in the ventral striatum during charitable donation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 621-631. doi:10.1162/jocn.2009.21228
    • Jackson, C. J., & Smillie, L. D. (2004). Appetitive motivation predicts the majority of personality and an ability measure: A comparison of BAS measures and a reevaluation of the importance of RST. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1627-1636. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.06.010
    • Kenrick, D. T., & Shiota, M. N. (2008). Approach and avoidance. In A. J. Elliot (Ed.), Handbook of approach and avoidance motivation (pp. 273-288). New York: Psychology Press.
    • Kortenkamp, K. V., & Moore, C. F. (2006). Time, uncertainty, and individual differences in decisions to cooperate in resource dilemmas. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 603-615. doi:10.1177/0146167205284006
    • Krupić, D., & Corr, P. J. (2014). Individual differences in emotion elicitation in university examinations: A quasi-experimental study. Personality and Individual Differences, 71, 176-180. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.08.001
    • Krupić, D., Križanić, V., Ručević, S., Gračanin, A., & Corr, P. J. (2016). Five reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST) of personality questionnaires: Comparison, validity and generalization. In submission.
    • Penke, L. (2010). Bridging the gap between modern evolutionary psychology and the study of individual differences. In D. M. Buss, & P. H. Hawley (Eds.), The evolution of personality and individual differences (pp. 243-279). New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195372090.003.0009
    • Penke, L., Denissen, J. J. A., & Miller, G. F. (2007). The evolutionary genetics of personality. European Journal of Personality, 21, 549-587. doi:10.1002/per.629
    • R Development Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
    • Revelle, W. (2015). psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA, http://CRAN.Rproject.org/package=psych
    • Rosati, A. G., Stevens, J. R., Hare, B., & Hauser, M. D. (2007). The evolutionary origins of human patience: Temporal preferences in chimpanzees, bonobos, and human adults. Current Biology, 17, 1663-1668. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2007.08.033
    • Scott-Phillips, T. C., Dickins, T. E., & West, S. A. (2011). Evolutionary theory and the ultimate-proximate distinction in the human behavioral sciences. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 38-47. doi:10.1177/1745691610393528
    • Sellers, J. G., Mehl, M. R., & Josephs, R. A. (2007). Hormones and personality: Testosterone as a marker of individual differences. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 126-138. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.004
    • Smillie, L. D., Jackson, C. J., & Dalgleish, L. I. (2006). Conceptual distinctions among Carver and White's (1994) BAS scales: A reward-reactivity versus trait impulsivity perspective. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1039-1050. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.10.012
    • Stevens, J. R., Cushman, F. A., & Hauser, M. D. (2005). Evolving the psychological mechanisms for cooperation. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 36, 499-518. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.36.113004.083814
    • Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1988). The evolution of war and its cognitive foundations. Institute for evolutionary studies technical report, 88(1), 1-15. Santa Barbara: Institute for Evolutionary Studies, University of California at Santa Barbara. Retrieved from http://www.cep.ucsb.edu/papers/EvolutionofWar.pdf
    • Torrubia, R., Avila, C., Molto, J., & Caseras, X. (2001). The Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire (SPSRQ) as a measure of Gray's anxiety and
    • Yamasue, H., Abe, O., Suga, M., Yamada, H., Rogers, M. A., Aoki, S., Nobumasa, K., & Kasai, K. (2008). Sex-linked neuroanatomical basis of human altruistic cooperativeness. Cerebral Cortex, 18, 2331-2340. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhm254
  • No related research data.
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article