Extant literature consistently demonstrates the level of self-determination individuals experience or demonstrate during an activity can be primed. However, considering most of this literature comes from a period wherein p-hacking was prevalent (pre-2015), it may be that these effects reflect false positives. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether published literature showing autonomous and controlling motivation priming effects contain evidential value or not. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify relevant priming research, while set rules determined which effects from each study would be used in p-curve analysis. Two p-curves including 33 effects each were constructed. P-curve analyses, even after excluding surprising effects (e.g., effects large in magnitude), demonstrated that literature showing autonomous and controlling motivation priming effects contained evidential value. The present findings support prior literature suggesting the effects of autonomous and controlling motivation primes exist at the population level. They also reduce (but do not eliminate) concerns from broader psychology that p-hacking may underlie reported effects.

现有文献一致表明，个人在活动期间体验或展示的自决水平可以被激发。然而，考虑到这些文献大部分来自 p-hacking 盛行的时期（2015 年之前），这些影响可能反映了误报。本研究的目的是调查显示自主和控制动机启动效应的已发表文献是否包含证据价值。进行了系统的文献搜索以识别相关的启动研究，同时设定规则确定每个研究的哪些影响将用于 p 曲线分析。构建了两条 p 曲线，每条曲线包括 33 种效应。P 曲线分析，即使在排除了令人惊讶的影响（例如，规模很大的影响）之后，证明显示自主和控制动机启动效应的文献包含证据价值。目前的研究结果支持先前的文献表明自主和控制动机素数的影响存在于人口水平。他们还减少（但不消除）更广泛的心理学担忧，即 p-hacking 可能是报告影响的基础。