We tested the longstanding belief that performance is a function of the interaction between cognitive ability and motivation. Using raw data or values obtained from primary study authors as input (k = 40 to 55; N = 8,507 to 11,283), we used meta-analysis to assess the strength and consistency of the multiplicative effects of ability and motivation on performance. A triangulation of evidence based on several types of analyses revealed that the effects of ability and motivation on performance are additive rather than multiplicative. For example, the additive effects of ability and motivation accounted for about 91% of the explained variance in job performance, whereas the ability-motivation interaction accounted for only about 9% of the explained variance. In addition, when there was an interaction, it did not consistently reflect the predicted form (i.e., a stronger ability-performance relation when motivation is higher). Other key findings include that ability was relatively more important to training performance and to performance on work-related tasks in laboratory studies, whereas ability and motivation were similarly important to job performance. In addition, statelike measures of motivation were better predictors of performance than were traitlike measures. These findings have implications for theories about predictors of performance, state versus trait motivation, and maximal versus typical performance. They also have implications for talent management practices concerned with human capital acquisition and the prediction of employee performance.
*AbodE. T.2001. Interpersonal characteristics and citizenship climate as predictors of contextual performance in organizations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA.
2.
AguinisH.1995. Statistical power problems with moderated multiple regression in management research. Journal of Management, 21: 1141-1158.
3.
AguinisH.BeatyJ. C.BoikR. J.PierceC. A.2005. Effect size and power in assessing moderating effects of categorical variables using multiple regression: A 30-year review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 94-107.
4.
AguinisH.EdwardsJ. R.BradleyK. J. in press. Improving our understanding of moderation and mediation in strategic management research. Organizational Research Methods. doi:10.1177/1094428115627498
5.
BanduraA.1997. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
6.
*BarrickM. R.MountM. K.StraussJ. P.1993. Conscientiousness and performance of sales representatives: Test of the mediating effects of goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 715-722.
7.
*BarrosE.KauselE. E.CuadraF.DiazD. A.2014. Using general mental ability and personality traits to predict job performance in three Chilean organizations. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 22: 432-438.
8.
BauerT. N.ErdoganB.2010. Organizational behavior (v1.1). Nyack, NY: Flat World Knowledge.
9.
*BellB. S.KozlowskiS. W. J.2002a. Adaptive guidance: Enhancing self-regulation, knowledge, and performance in technology-based training. Personnel Psychology, 55: 267-306.
10.
BellB. S.KozlowskiS. W. J.2002b. Goal orientation and ability: Interactive effects on self-efficacy, performance, and knowledge. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 497-505.
11.
*BellB. S.KozlowskiS. W. J.2008. Active learning: Effects of core training design elements on self-regulatory processes, learning, and adaptability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93: 296-316.
12.
BernerthJ. B.AguinisH.2016. A critical review and best-practice recommendations for control variable usage. Personnel Psychology, 69: 229-283.
13.
BerryC. M.ClarkM. A.McClureT. K.2011. Racial/ethnic differences in the criterion-related validity of cognitive ability tests: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96: 881-906.
14.
BertuaC.AndersonN.SalgadoJ. F.2005. The predictive validity of cognitive ability tests: A UK meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78: 387-409.
15.
BeusJ. M.WhitmanD. S.2012. The relationship between typical and maximum performance: A meta-analytic examination. Human Performance, 25: 355-376.
16.
*BlackJ.2000. Personality testing and police selection: Utility of the “Big Five.”New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 29: 2-9.
17.
*BlauG.1993. Operationalizing direction and level of effort and testing their relationships to individual job performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55: 152-170.
18.
*BonoJ. E.2001. Self-determination at work: The motivational effects of transformational leadership. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City.
*BradleyJ. P.1997. Predicting basic military officer training performance with three types of personality measures: Self-reports, interviewer ratings and reference ratings. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. Sciences and Engineering (Order no. AAMNQ28477).
21.
*BrownK. G.1996. Motivational and informational consequences of errors in early skill acquisition: The effects of individual differences and training strategy on perceptions of negative feedback. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City.
22.
CampbellJ. P.1990. Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial organizational psychology. In DunnetteM. D.HoughL. M. (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology: 687-732. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
23.
CampbellJ. P.McCloyR. A.OpplerS. H.SagerC. E.1993. A theory of performance. In SchmittN.BormanW. C. (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations: 35-70. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
24.
CampbellJ. P.WiernikB. M.2015. The modeling and assessment of work performance. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2: 47-74.
25.
CarrettaT. R.TeachoutM. S.ReeM. J.BartoE. L.KingR. E.MichaelsC. F.2014. Consistency of the relations of cognitive ability and personality traits to pilot training performance. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 24: 247-264.
26.
CascioW. F.AguinisH.2008. Research in industrial and organizational psychology from 1963 to 2007: Changes, choices, and trends. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93: 1062-1081.
27.
CerasoliC. P.2014. Performance = Ability × Motivation: Exploring untested moderators of a popular model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York, Albany.
28.
ChenG.GullyS. M.EdenD.2004. General self-efficacy and self-esteem: Toward theoretical and empirical distinction between correlated self-evaluations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25: 375-395.
29.
ChenG.GullyS. M.WhitemanJ.-A.KilcullenR. N.2000. Examination of relationships among trait-like individual differences, state-like individual differences, and learning performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85: 835-847.
30.
*CorkerK. S.2012. Enhancing achievement through intervention: How conscientiousness and cognitive ability impact responses to goal setting and implementation intentions interventions. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. Sciences and Engineering (Order no. AAI3512848).
31.
DachlerH. P.MobleyW. H.1973. Construct validation of an instrumentality-expectancy-task-goal model of work motivation: Some theoretical boundary conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 58: 397-418.
32.
DalalR. S.BhaveD. P.FisetJ.2014. Within-person variability in job performance: A theoretical review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 40: 1396-1436.
33.
DaltonD. R.AguinisH.DaltonC. A.BoscoF. A.PierceC. A.2012. Revisiting the file drawer problem in meta-analysis: An empirical assessment of published and non-published correlation matrices. Personnel Psychology, 65: 221-249.
34.
DiefendorffJ. M.ChandlerM. M.2011. Motivating employees. In ZedeckS. (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (vol. 3): Maintaining, expanding, and contracting the organization: 65-135. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
35.
DuBoisC. L. Z.SackettP. R.ZedeckS.FogliL.1993. Further exploration of typical and maximum performance criteria: Definitional issues, prediction, and white-black differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 205-211.
36.
*FisherS. L.FordJ. K.1998. Differential effects of learner effort and goal orientation on two learning outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 51: 397-420.
37.
FleishmanE. A.1958. A relationship between incentive motivation and ability level in psychomotor performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56: 78-81.
38.
FrenchE. G.1957. Effects of interaction of achievement, motivation, and intelligence on problem-solving success. American Psychologist, 12: 399-400.
39.
GavinJ. F.1970. Ability, effort, and role perception as antecedents of job performance. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
40.
GibsonD. E.CallisterR. R.2010. Anger in organizations: Review and integration. Journal of Management, 36: 66-93.
41.
Gόmez-MejίaL. R.BalkinD. B.CardyR. L.2007. Managing human resources (vol. 5). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
42.
Gonzalez-MuléE.MountM. K.OhI.-S.2014. A meta-analysis of the relationship between general mental ability and nontask performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99: 1222-1243.
43.
GuzzoR. A.JetteR. D.KatzellR. A.1985. The effects of psychologically based intervention programs on worker productivity: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 38: 275-291.
44.
*HausdorfP. A.RisavyS. D.2015. Predicting training and job performance for transit operators. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 23: 191-195.
45.
HattrupK.O’ConnellM. S.WingateP. H.1998. Prediction of multidimensional criteria: Distinguishing task and contextual performance. Human Performance, 11: 305-319.
46.
HedgesL. V.OlkinI.1985. Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando: Academic Press.
47.
HirschfeldR. R.LawsonL.MossholderK. W.2004. Moderators of the relationship between cognitive ability and performance: General versus context-specific achievement motivation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34: 2389-2409.
48.
HobfollS. E.1989. Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44: 513-524.
49.
HoganJ.HollandB.2003. Using theory to evaluate personality and job-performance relations: A socioanalytic perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 100-112.
50.
HollenbeckJ. R.BriefA. P.WhitenerE. M.PauliK. E.1988. An empirical note on the interaction of personality and aptitude in personnel selection. Journal of Management, 14: 441-451.
51.
*HuangL.2012. A multifocal framework of personality applied to training and transfer. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
52.
HunterJ. E.1983. Test validation for 12,000 jobs: An application of job classification and validity generalization analysis to the General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Employment Service.
53.
HunterJ. E.SchmidtF. L.1996. Intelligence and job performance. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2: 447-472.
54.
HunterJ. E.SchmidtF. L.2004. Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
55.
*IliescuD.IlieA.IspasD.IonA.2012. Emotional intelligence in personnel selection: Applicant reactions, criterion, and incremental validity. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 20: 347-358.
56.
JohnsonJ. W.2000. A heuristic method for estimating the relative weights of predictor variables in multiple regression. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 35: 1-19.
57.
KanferR.1990. Motivation theory and industrial and organizational psychology. In DunnetteM. D.HoughL. M. (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, vol. 1: 75-170. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
58.
KanferR.AckermanP. L.1989. Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74: 657-690.
59.
KanferR.AckermanP. L.MurthaT. C.DugdaleB.NelsonL.1994. Goal setting, conditions of practice, and task performance: A resource allocation perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79: 826-835.
60.
KanferR.ChenG.PritchardR. D.2008. Work motivation: Forging new perspectives and directions in the post-millennium. In KanferR.ChenG.PritchardR. D. (Eds.), Work motivation: Past, present, and future: 601-632. New York: Taylor & Francis.
61.
KanferR.HeggestadE. D.1997. Motivational traits and skills: A person-centered approach to work motivation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19: 1-56.
62.
KaterbergR.BlauG. J.1983. An examination of level and direction of effort and job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 26: 249-257.
63.
*KozlowskiS. W. J.BellB. S.2006. Disentangling achievement orientation and goal setting: Effects on self-regulatory processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 900-916.
64.
*KrajewskiH. T.GoffinR. D.McCarthyJ. M.RothsteinM. G.JohnstonN.2006. Comparing the validity of structured interviews for managerial-level employees: Should we look to the past or focus on the future?Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79: 411-432.
65.
LandyF. J.ConteJ. M.2004. Work in the 21st century: An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.
66.
*LathamG. P.SeijtsG.CrimD.2008. The effects of learning goal difficulty level and cognitive ability on performance. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 40: 220-229.
67.
LawlerE. E. I.PorterL. W.1967. Antecedent attitudes of effective managerial performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 2: 122-142.
68.
LeH.SchmidtF. L.PutkaD. J.2009. The multifaceted nature of measurement artifacts and its implications for estimating construct-level relationships. Organizational Research Methods, 12: 165-200.
69.
LeBretonJ. M.HargisM. B.GriepentrogB.OswaldF. L.PloyhartR. E.2007. A multidimensional approach for evaluating variables in organizational research and practice. Personnel Psychology, 60: 475-498.
70.
*LeeY.-T.StettlerA.AntonakisJ.2011. Incremental validity and indirect effect of ethical development on work performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 50: 1110-1115.
71.
*LePineJ. A.Van DyneL. V.2001. Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance: Evidence of differential relationships with Big Five personality characteristics and cognitive ability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 326-336.
72.
LockeE. A.FerenD. B.McCalebV. M.ShawK. N.DennyA. T.1980. The relative effectiveness of four methods of motivating employee performance. In DuncanK. D.GrunebergM. M.WallisD. (Eds.), Changes in working life: 363-388. New York: Wiley.
73.
LockeE. A.LathamG. P.1990. A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
74.
MaierN. R. F.1955. Psychology in industry: A psychological approach to industrial problems. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
75.
*MarcusB.GoffinR. D.JohnstonN. G.RothsteinM. G.2007. Personality and cognitive ability as predictors of typical and maximum managerial performance. Human Performance, 20: 275-285.
76.
McClellandG. H.JuddC. M.1993. Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114: 376-390.
77.
*McCloyR. A.CampbellJ. P.CudeckR.1994. A confirmatory test of a model of performance determinants. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79: 493-505.
78.
MischelW.1973. Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality. Psychological Review, 80: 252-253.
79.
MitchellT. R.DanielsD.2003. Motivation. In BormanW. C.IlgenD. R.KlimoskiR. J. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology, vol. 12: 225-254. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
80.
MorgesonF. P.HumphreyS. E.2006. The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 1321-1339.
81.
*MotowidloS. J.Van ScotterJ. R.1994. Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4: 475-480.
82.
MountM. K.BarrickM. R.StraussJ. P.1999. The joint relationship of conscientiousness and ability with performance: Test of the interaction hypothesis. Journal of Management, 25: 707-721.
83.
*MountM. K.OhI.-S.BurnsM.2008. Incremental validity of perceptual speed and accuracy over general mental ability. Personnel Psychology, 61: 113-139.
84.
MurphyK. R.RussellC. J. in press. Mend it or end it: Redirecting the search for interactions in the organizational sciences. Organizational Research Methods. doi:10.1177/1094428115625322
85.
*MusselP.2013. Introducing the construct curiosity for predicting job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34: 453-472.
86.
*MusselP.SpenglerM.LitmanJ.SchulerH.2011. Development and validation of the German work-related curiosity scale. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 28: 109-117.
87.
NathanB. R.AlexanderR. A.1988. A comparison of criteria for test validation: A meta-analytic investigation. Personnel Psychology, 41: 517-535.
88.
O’ConnorB. P.1998. All-in-one programs for exploring interactions in moderated multiple regression. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58: 833-837.
89.
*OnoM.SachauD. A.DealW. P.EnglertD. R.TaylorM. D.2011. Cognitive ability, emotional intelligence, and the Big Five personality dimensions as predictors of criminal investigator performance. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38: 471-491.
90.
*PerryS. J.HunterE. M.WittL. A.HarrisK. J.2010. P = f(Conscientiousness × Ability): Examining the facets of conscientiousness. Human Performance, 23: 343-360.
91.
PhillipsJ. M.GullyS. M.1997. Role of goal orientation, ability, need for achievement, and locus of control in self-efficacy and goal-setting process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82: 792-802.
92.
*PloyhartR. E.1999. An interactionist approach to assessing personality in work contexts: Construct validation of a predictor of customer service performance. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. Sciences and Engineering (Order no. AAI9948157).
93.
PorterL. W.LawlerE. E. I.1968. Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, IL: Irwin-Dorsey.
94.
*PulakosE. D.SchmittN.DorseyD. W.AradS.HedgeJ. W.BormanW. C.2002. Predicting adaptive performance: Further tests of a model of adaptability. Human Performance, 15: 299-323.
95.
*RobinsonR. P.2009. The effect of individual differences on training process variables in a multistage computer-based training context. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. Sciences and Engineering (Order no. AAI3361738).
96.
*RobsonS. M.AbrahamJ. D.WeinerJ.2010. Characteristics of successful direct support professionals: An examination of personality and cognitive ability requirements. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 18: 215-219.
97.
RotundoM.SackettP. R.2002. The relative importance of task, citizenship, and counterproductive performance to global ratings of job performance: A policy-capturing approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 66-80.
98.
SackettP. R.GruysM. L.EllingsonJ. E.1998. Ability–personality interactions when predicting job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 545-556.
99.
SalgadoJ. F.AndersonN.MoscosoS.BertuaC.de FruytF.2003. International validity generalization of GMA and cognitive abilities: A European community meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 56: 573-605.
100.
*SavoyP. J.2004. Development and validation of a measure of self-directed learning competency. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, Kent, OH.
101.
*ScheuC. R.2008. Using goal orientation to develop customized learning environments: An interactionist approach. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. Sciences and Engineering (Order no. AAI3332007).
102.
SchmidtF. L.HunterJ. E.1992. Development of a causal model of processes determining job performance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1: 89-92.
103.
SchmidtF. L.HunterJ. E.1998. The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124: 262-274.
104.
SchmidtF. L.HunterJ. E.OuterbridgeA. N.1986. The impact of job experience and ability on job knowledge, work sample performance, and supervisory ratings of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71: 432-439.
105.
*SchmidtG. B.2008. Learning and performance goals: Disentangling the effects of goal specificity. Unpublished master’s thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
106.
*SeijtsG.CrimD.2009. The combined effects of goal type and cognitive ability on performance. Motivation and Emotion, 33: 343-352.
107.
SpeilbergerC. D.SydemanS. J.OwenA. E.MarshB. J.1999. Measuring anxiety and anger with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI). In MaruishM. E. (Ed.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment (2nd ed.): 993-1021. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
108.
*StanhopeD. S.PondS. B.IIISurfaceE. A.2013. Core self-evaluations and training effectiveness: Prediction through motivational intervening mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98: 820-831.
109.
SteelP. D.Kammeyer-MuellerJ. D.2002. Comparing meta-analytic moderator estimation techniques under realistic conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 96-111.
110.
SteyerR.SchmittM.EidM.1999. Latent state-trait theory and research in personality and individual differences. European Journal of Personality, 13: 389-408.
111.
TerborgJ. R.1977. Validation and extension of an individual differences model of work performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 18: 188-216.
112.
*TolliA. P.2009. Motivational and self-regulatory responses to interruptions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Akron, Akron, OH.
113.
TubbsM. E.1986. Goal-setting: A meta-analytic examination of the empirical evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71: 474-483.
114.
*Van IddekingeC. H.FerrisG. R.HeffnerT. S2009. Test of a multistage model of distal and proximal antecedents of leader performance. Personnel Psychology, 62: 463-495.
115.
*VasilopoulosN. L.CucinaJ. M.HunterA. E.2007. Personality and training proficiency: Issues of bandwidth-fidelity and curvilinearity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80: 109-131.
116.
VroomV. H.1964. Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
117.
*WatsonA. M.SurfaceE. A.2012. Trainee characteristics and achievement during special operations forces initial acquisition foreign language training. Raleigh, NC: SWA Consulting.
118.
WatsonD.ClarkL. A.TellegenA.1988. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54: 1063-1070.
119.
*WeilbaecherA. D.2000. Self-report personality measures of fake good in employment selection. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. Sciences and Engineering (Order no. AAI9985678).
120.
WilliamsL. J.AndersonS. E.1991. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17: 601-617.
121.
Wonderlic Associates. 1999. Wonderlic personnel test and scholastic level exam. Libertyville, IL: Author.
122.
WoodJ. A.2008. Methodology for dealing with duplicate study effects in a meta-analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 11: 79-95.
123.
*WrightP. M.KacmarK. M.McMahanG. C.DeleeuwK.1995. P=f(M × A): Cognitive ability as a moderator of the relationship between personality and job performance. Journal of Management, 21: 1129-1139.
124.
*YeoG. B.NealA.2004. A multilevel analysis of effort, practice, and performance: Effects of ability, conscientiousness, and goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89: 231-247.
125.
YeoG.NealA.2008. Subjective cognitive effort: A model of states, traits, and time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93: 617-631.
126.
*ZieglerM.BenschD.MaaßU.SchultV.VogelM.BühnerM.2014. Big Five facets as predictor of job training performance: The role of specific job demands. Learning and Individual Differences, 29: 1-7.
127.
ZyphurM. J.BradleyJ. C.LandisR. S.ThoresonC. J.2008. The effects of cognitive ability and conscientiousness on performance over time: A censored latent growth model. Human Performance, 21: 1-27.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
