# Reward as a facet of word meaning: Ratings of motivation for 8,601 English words

## TL;DR

This study explores how the concept of reward influences word meaning by rating the motivation associated with 8,601 English words.

## Contribution

The study introduces a novel dataset of motivation ratings for a large set of English words, distinct from traditional valence measures.

## Key findings

- Motivation ratings capture semantic information distinct from emotional valence and concreteness.
- Motivation ratings uniquely predict performance in lexical and memory tasks.
- A composite reward measure combining motivation and valence did not add explanatory power beyond individual variables.

## Abstract

Semantic representations arise from a distillation of multiple sources of information, including sensory, motor, affective, interoceptive, linguistic and cognitive experience. Experience of reward is a highly salient aspect of many human activities, and yet its contribution to semantic processing is not well understood. To address this, the present study took a psycholinguistic approach to measuring and evaluating associations with reward as a facet of word meaning. Behavioural and neurophysiological data suggest that reward processing involves multiple stages and mechanisms. For instance, systems associated with the experience and anticipation of pleasure in response to a reward appear distinct from motivational processes that underlie the pursuit of a stimulus. We sought to collect a novel set of word ratings that capture the full extent of reward-related experience. Initial explorations revealed that reward/pleasure ratings are highly correlated with existing norms of emotional valence. Ratings of association with motivation, however, were only moderately correlated with valence, suggesting they capture distinct semantic information. We therefore conducted a preregistered large-scale study to obtain motivation ratings for 8,601 words. Our analyses suggest these ratings capture aspects of word meaning which are distinct from other semantic dimensions, such as concreteness and valence. Moreover, they explain unique variance in participant performance on lexical, semantic, and recognition memory tasks. We combined motivation and emotional valence ratings to provide a composite measure that might approximate a more general ‘reward’ construct. However, this did not explain additional variance compared to the individual variables. We discuss the implications of these results for neurocognitive theories of semantics.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.3758/s13428-025-02762-8.