Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation and Participation in Budgeting: Antecedents and Consequences
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
- Candidate categories
- none
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: ObservationalConsensus signal: Observational
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.106
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.439
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
- Teacher spread
- 0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Based on Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Ryan and Deci 2000b; Gagne´ and Deci 2005), the present research proposes and tests a motivation-based model of participation in budgeting that distinguishes among intrinsic motivation, autonomous extrinsic motivation, and controlled extrinsic motivation for participative budgeting. The proposed model was tested using a survey conducted among managers of an international bank. The results suggest that while intrinsic motivation and autonomous extrinsic motivation for participation in budgeting are positively related to performance, controlled extrinsic motivation is negatively associated with performance. These findings highlight the importance of distinguishing among various forms of motivation in participative budgeting research and suggest that the mechanism by which the information benefits of participation in budgeting are obtained may be more complex than assumed. The results also provide evidence of the viability of using the proposed model to study commonly assumed reasons for participative budgeting within a general theoretically based framework of motivation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
The record
- Venue
- Behavioral Research in Accounting
- Topic
- Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
- Field
- Psychology
- Canadian institutions
- Wilfrid Laurier University
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- Deci-Intrinsic motivationPsychologySelf-determination theoryGoal theoryMotivation theorySocial psychologyPolitical science
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes