Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?
[NOT READ; content reaches the vault only through the 1999 paper's own description of it] Eisenberger, R., & Cameron, J. (1996). 'Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?' American Psychologist, 51(11), 1153-1166. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.51.11.1153. As the 1999 paper reports their figures: no significant effect for all rewards pooled on free choice, a significant enhancement on self-report, a significant reduction for expected tangible rewards on free choice, and no effect for unexpected tangible rewards, agreeing with Deci. Their argued position is that the detrimental effect is limited and easily avoided in applied settings.
[NOT READ; content reaches the vault only through the 1999 paper's own description of it] Eisenberger, R., & Cameron, J. (1996). 'Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?' American Psychologist, 51(11), 1153-1166. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.51.11.1153. As the 1999 paper reports their figures: no significant effect for all rewards pooled on free choice, a significant enhancement on self-report, a significant reduction for expected tangible rewards on free choice, and no effect for unexpected tangible rewards, agreeing with Deci. Their argued position is that the detrimental effect is limited and easily avoided in applied settings.
Written from the nOT READ; content reaches the vault only through the 1999 paper's own description of it.
What our sources record
Recorded when this source was checked, figures included, with page references and quotation marks removed.
Eisenberger, R., & Cameron, J. (1996). Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth? American Psychologist, 51(11), 1153-1166.