Abstractvorlage für Nachwuchspreis 5. Jahrestagung der SGS 2013 in Basel
Title:
Dissociative effects of implicit vs. explicit power motivation on cortisol and state anxiety levels in
response to physical and psychological stress
Authors: Wegner, M.1, Windisch, C. 2, & Budde, H.3
1
Institut für Sportwissenschaft, Universität Bern, Schweiz; 2Jacobs University Bremen, Germany;
3
Medical School Hamburg, Germany
Abstract:
Introduction:
The power motive is defined as the need to have mental, physical, or emotional impact on others.
McClelland, Koestner, and Weinberger (1989) differentiate between implicit and explicit motives.
Implicit motives are more closely connected to spontaneous and repeatedly shown behavior and
have a hormonal basis. Explicit motives, in contrast, have not been shown to be linked to hormones
but have been associated with attitudes, self-attributes, decisions, and evaluations. Measures of the
implicit power motive have been previously connected to different physiological stress parameters
(McClelland, 1979) among them the hormone cortisol. Especially when an individual is afraid of losing
control of a situation significant changes in saliva cortisol levels could be reported (e.g., Wirth, Welsh,
& Schultheiss, 2006). In the present study, we hypothesized that students’ hormonal stress reactions
to physical and psychological stress are affected by the implicit power motive. In contrast, we assumed that students’ cognitive stress evaluations are more strongly affected by their self-attributed
desire for power, the explicit power motive.
Methods:
Fifty-seven high school students (33 female, 24 male) at the age of M = 14.8 years (SD = 0.5) participated in the study. The implicit power motive was determined using a projective measure, the Operant Multimotive Test (Kuhl & Scheffer, 1999). The explicit power motive was assessed using a questionnaire (Personality Research Form; Jackson, 1999). Saliva cortisol levels and the cognitive component of the German version of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory were assessed (Brand,
Ehrlenspiel, & Graf, 2009) before (pre) and after (post) a 15-minute period of stress induction. Participants were randomly assigned to three experimental groups. A physical stress group ran continously
for 15 minutes at a defined heart rate of 65-75% of their individual maximum heart rate level (HRmax).
Participants in the psychological stress group worked on a standard intelligence test (HAWIK-IV;
Petermann & Petermann, 2006) for the same amount of time. The person who administered the
intelligence test left the students under the assumptions that their intelligence test scores will be
made public in class after the completion of the test in order to produce a socio-evaluative stress
environment. The control group participated in a regular class session for 15 minutes. After the respective 15 minutes of stress intervention had been completed participants’ saliva cortisol levels and
their subjective evaluation of state anxiety (CSAI) were repeatedly assessed.
Results:
The implicit but not the explicit power motive affected cortisol changes depending on the allocation
to the experimental group, F = 3.24, p < .05, 2 = .11. Participants with a high implicit power motive
showed increased cortisol levels after the physical as well as after the psychological stressor when
compared to the control group. Students with a low implicit power motive also had elevated cortisol
levels in the psychological stress and the control group. However, only in the physical stress group
cortisol levels decreased.
In contrast, only the explicit but not the implicit power motive, by trend, affected cognitive state
anxiety changes, F = 2.69, p < .08, 2 = .10. Participants with a high explicit power motive who were
running in the physical stress group reported a reduced feeling of competitive state anxiety. In contrast, working on the intelligence test elevated students’ levels of competitive state anxiety while the
control group did not change at all. However, participants with a low explicit power motive showed
no changes of cognitive state anxiety, neither in the physical nor in the psychological stress group.
5. Jahrestagung der SGS in Basel
WWW.SPORTWISSENSCHAFT.CH
WWW.SIENCESDUSPORT.CH
Discussion/Conclusion:
The data from this study confirm findings that implicit motive measures are associated with hormonal
stress parameters like cortisol. Changes in cortisol levels in this study could only be linked to a projective measure of power motivation. In contrast, students’ self-reported evaluation of competitive
state anxiety by means of a questionnaire was only affected by the explicit power motive assessed
with a questionnaire. Future research on the link between motivation and stress reactions should
determine first what outcome variable is of interest for a study. If actual behavior or physiological
parameters like cortisol are to be predicted projective measures like the OMT are much more promising. In contrast, if researchers are interested in affective evaluations of a situation or self-attributes
questionnaires examining participants’ motivation seem to be of greater value. This is in line with
other findings on the discrimination of implicit and explicit motives (Brunstein, 2008).
References:
Brand, R., Ehrlenspiel, F., & Graf, K. (2009). Wettkampf-Angst-Inventar (WAI). Bonn: Bundesinstitut
für Sportwissenschaft.
Brunstein, J. C. (2008). Implicit and explicit motives. In J. Heckhausen & H. Heckhausen (Eds.),
Motivation and Action (pp. 221-246). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jackson, D. N. (1999). Personality Research Form manual (3rd ed.). New York: Research Psychologists
Press.
Kuhl, J., & Scheffer, D. (1999). Der Operante Multi-Motiv-Test (OMT): Manual [The Operant
Multimotive Test (OMT): Manual]. University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
McClelland, D. C. (1979). Inhibited power motivation and high blood pressure in men. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 88(2), 182-190.
McClelland, D. C., Koestner, R., & Weinberger, J. (1989). How do self-attributed and implicit motives
differ? Psychological Review, 96(4), 690-702.
Petermann, F., & Petermann, U. (2006). Hamburg-Wechsler-Intelligenztest für Kinder (HAWIK-IV).
Bern: Huber.
Wirth, M. M., Welsh, K. M., & Schultheiss, O. C. (2006). Salivary cortisol changes in humans after
winning or losing a dominance contest depend on implicit power motivation. Hormones and
Behavior, 49(3), 346-352.