Empirically Informed, Idiographic Networks of Concordant and Discordant Motives: An Experience Sampling Study With Network Analysis in Non-Clinical Participants Research Articles Empirically Informed, Idiographic Networks of Concordant and Discordant Motives: An Experience Sampling Study With Network Analysis in Non-Clinical Participants Thies Lüdtke 1,2 , Fabian Steiner 3 , Thomas Berger 3 , Stefan Westermann 4 [1] Department of Human Medicine, MSH Medical School Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. [2] Institute of Sustainability Psychology, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany. [3] Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. [4] Department of Psychology and Psychotherapy, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany. Clinical Psychology in Europe, 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305, https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 Received: 2023-06-30 • Accepted: 2024-11-24 • Published (VoR): 2025-05-28 Handling Editor: Winfried Rief, Philipps-University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany Corresponding Author: Stefan Westermann, Chair of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Department of Psychology and Psychotherapy, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 44, 58455 Witten, Germany. Phone: +49 2302 92 6789. E-mail: Stefan.Westermann@uni-wh.de Supplementary Materials: Materials [see Index of Supplementary Materials] Abstract Background: Case formulations and treatment planning mostly rely on self-reports, observations, and third-party reports. We propose that these data sources can be complemented by idiographic networks of motive interactions, which are empirically derived from everyday life using the Experience Sampling Method (ESM). In these networks, positive edges represent concordance of motives whereas negative edges indicate discordance. Based on consistency theory, which states that discordance emerges when the activity of one motive (e.g., ‘affiliation’) is incompatible with the activity of another motive (e.g., ‘autonomy’), we hypothesized that discordance would be associated with subclinical depressive symptoms. Method: Fifty-one undergraduates completed a six-day ESM assessment period with 6 assessments of motive satisfaction per day. Based on the ESM data, idiographic networks of the seven most important motives per person were computed using mlVAR (https://doi.org/10.32614/CRAN.package.mlVAR). We extracted indices of motive dynamics from each person’s network, namely the strength of negative edges compared to the overall network This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, CC BY 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction, provided the original work is properly cited. https://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.32872/cpe.12305&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2025-05-28 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2019-3842 https://orcid.org/0009-0003-6361-9783 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2432-7791 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4785-0024 https://doi.org/10.32614/CRAN.package.mlVAR https://www.psychopen.eu/ https://cpe.psychopen.eu/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ strength as well as the values of the single most negative and positive edges. These indices were then used to predict subclinical depressive symptoms, controlling for overall motive satisfaction. Results: Discordant, conflicting motive relationships made up only 6% of network strengths, indicating high concordance overall. Neither conflict index predicted subclinical depressive symptoms but maximum concordance was associated with lower subclinical depressive symptoms. Motive satisfaction was a significant predictor across models. Conclusion: The applicability and clinical utility of the motive network approach was promising. Insufficient variance due to a healthy sample and the small number of observations limit the interpretability of findings. Keywords consistency theory, approach, avoidance, motive, concordance, conflict Highlights • A novel approach to estimating idiographic networks of motives is introduced. • Network links between motives indicate discordance (= conflict) or concordance (= compatibility). • Motive satisfaction and concordance were associated with lower subclinical depressive symptoms. • Unexpectedly, motive conflicts were not associated with subclinical depressive symptoms. Theoretical Background For decades, therapists have relied on the same data sources for case conceptualization and treatment planning (Eells, 2007), namely questionnaires or clinical interviews, ob­ servations (e.g., nonverbal behavior), and information from third parties, such as fami­ ly members. These data are undoubtedly indispensable but their ‘ecological validity’, meaning the applicability to real-world situations (Kihlstrom, 2021), can be questioned. One way to supplement traditional methods of case conceptualization is the structured assessment of patients’ experiences and behaviors in daily life, a method referred to as the Experience Sampling Method (Larson & Csikszentmihalyi, 2014), which relies on repeated self-report assessments, for example using smartphones. The feasibility of person-specific ESM studies has been demonstrated (Bak et al., 2016; Thonon et al., 2020; Wichers et al., 2016) and the necessary assessment tools (i.e., smartphones) are widely available (VuMa, 2023). Nonetheless, therapists seldom make use of this method beyond paper-pencil diaries in clinical practice, likely due to heavy caseload and lack of financial incentives. Experience Sampling results in datasets which allow the estimation of both group- based and idiographic (Molenaar, 2004) models. One statistical approach, which is appli­ cable to both types of models, is the so-called network approach (Borgatti et al., 2009), Motive Networks 2 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ which has gained popularity within psychological research over the past years (Fried et al., 2017; Robinaugh et al., 2020). In network models, constructs are represented as nodes and edges. Nodes are the variables of interest, often symptoms (Borsboom, 2017), whereas edges represent statistical relationships between them, computed, for example, as partial correlations. Such networks can take many forms, such as social networks in which nodes represent people (Tabassum et al., 2018) or semantic networks in which nodes represent semantic or lexical units (Christensen & Kenett, 2023). In the present study, nodes represent psychological constructs whereas edges represent the partial cor­ relations between these constructs. One of their major advantages is that networks can be graphically visualized, making them accessible to health professionals and patients alike (Bak et al., 2016). As Bak et al. (2016) phrase it, “discussing ESM results with a patient offers clues as to why and when symptoms vary, given certain stressors and contexts, with clues for protective mechanisms or coping strategies” (p. 8). Why are ESM-based, idiographic assessments of patients’ experiences and behaviors in daily life not already a standard tool for therapists? We argue that – in addition to above-mentioned reasons – the information that is usually assessed in idiographic networks is not useful enough in aiding the conceptualization and individualization of psychotherapy. Although symptom-focused networks help to understand the centrality of certain symptoms and strength of symptom associations (e.g., Beard et al., 2016), they provide limited information about the underlying processes that may have led to their formation or maintenance. Given that psychological interventions are often targeted at mechanisms rather than symptoms (e.g., metacognitive biases; Moritz & Woodward, 2007), symptom networks may have limited clinical utility (current network approaches have other shortcomings, too, such as limited utility in ordinal data, see Borsboom et al., 2021). In line with that, Scholten, Lischetzke, and Glombiewski (2022) recently proposed a combination of functional analytic and experience sampling approaches. Here, we use network theory to assume a motive-focused view that answers questions such as Does the patient value independence or confirmation by others, Does the patient seek intimacy and does she/he receive it, and most importantly Do the patient’s motivational goals clash? Against this background (Westermann et al., 2019) we propose that a more instructive source of information for therapists is the interplay of patients’ motives in their daily life, particularly when these are in conflict. The term ‘motive’ can be conceptualized as an active process that directs attention, cognition, and action (e.g., Schultheiss & Brunstein, 2005). According to Grawe (2004), motives serve as means to satisfy basic needs, such as the need for relatedness or autonomy (Deci & Ryan, 2000), and to protect them from violation. One can distinguish between approach and avoidance motives. Approach motives aim at creating or main­ taining appetitive, need-satisfying experiences, such as being liked by others (affiliation). In contrast, avoidance motives are directed towards preventing or ending aversive, need- violating experiences, such as being criticized (self-esteem), that a person wants to avoid Lüdtke, Steiner, Berger, & Westermann 3 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ (Coats et al., 1996; Grosse Holtforth, 2008). According to consistency theory, motive satis­ faction (i.e., ‘congruence’; Grawe, 2004) describes a state in which an approach motive is fulfilled (e.g., experiencing oneself as belonging) or the aversive experience is averted (e.g., avoiding being criticized), whereas motivational incongruence is characterized by the dissatisfaction of one’s motive, the latter being associated with mental health issues, such as loneliness (Gable, 2006) or the risk of chronicity of anxiety disorders (Struijs et al., 2018). When the satisfaction of one motive supports satisfaction of another motive, they are in a concordant relationship with each other. In contrast, a discordant relationship emerges when the satisfaction of one motive reduces the satisfaction of another motive. For example, belonging and being autonomous can be mutually exclusive, as assertive behavior can be accompanied by discontent of others whereas overly cooperative behav­ ior can violate one’s self-determination. Such motivational conflicts due to competing motives give rise to what is called ‘discordance’ within the framework of consistency theory. Discordance, in turn, is hypothesized to function as an ‘internal’ stressor (similar to cognitive dissonance; Festinger, 1957) that can facilitate the formation and mainte­ nance of psychopathology (Grawe, 2004). In line with this, psychotherapy is accompa­ nied by a reduction of incongruence (e.g., Berking et al., 2003) and psychological conflicts of goals (more broadly defined and not restricted to motives) are inversely associated with psychological well-being (Gray et al., 2017). We propose that ESM-based measurements of motive satisfaction and conflict are ideally suited to augment established methods of treatment planning because they allow assessing motivational dynamics in vivo and in personally relevant situations, unaffected by retrospective recall biases (Ben-Zeev & Young, 2010; Urban et al., 2018). According to our approach, the interplay of motives in daily life can be represented as an idiographic network, in which nodes depict motives and edges constitute concordant (i.e., positive) versus discordant (i.e., negative) relationships between motives, potentially providing information that helps to personalize treatment and improve the therapeutic relationship (Caspar, 1997). Importantly, we propose that motivational conflicts can be empirically assessed even when participants are not able to report those associations in self-reports (e.g., due to a simple lack of explicit representation or due to defense mechanisms in a psychodynamic sense, see Blanco et al., 2023). Table 1 provides an overview of relevant motive-related terms and how they were operationalized in the network methodology. The clinical utility of motive dynamics is not limited to a certain diagnosis or symp­ tom spectrum (Grosse Holtforth & Grawe, 2004). However, for the first-time validation of the proposed motive network approach, we focus on depressive symptoms. Accord­ ing to the reinforcement theory of depression (Ferster, 1973; Lewinsohn & Graf, 1973; Lewinsohn & Libet, 1972), a low rate of response-contingent positive reinforcement through rewarding activities is a key factor in the development and maintenance of depressive symptoms (Lewinsohn, 1974, p. 151). Within our motive network approach, Motive Networks 4 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ activities are perceived as rewarding if they satisfy an individual’s motives (Brockmeyer et al., 2015), but if the satisfaction of one motive is accompanied by the dissatisfaction of another motive (i.e., motivational discordance), activities may lose their reinforcing properties. Enduring states of conflict due to discordant motives could lead to diminished reinforcement and thus depressive symptoms whereas motivational concordance may be a protective factor. In sum, we hypothesized that individuals with higher subclinical depressive symp­ toms would display stronger motive conflicts, operationalized as the proportion of nega­ tive edges, as well as the magnitude of the largest negative edge within the individual’s network. Relatedly, we hypothesized that concordance, operationalized as the magnitude of the strongest positive edge would be associated with reduced subclinical depressive symptoms. We excluded avoidance motives from the analyses because they are empiri­ cally associated with psychopathology (Grosse Holtforth, 2008), which may confound analyses. Method Recruitment We recruited undergraduate psychology students who were compensated with course credits. Participants were eligible for participation if they were at least 18 years of age Table 1 Motive-Related Terms and Their Network Operationalization Term Network operationalization Motive Node (In)congruence Momentary value of node (0: incongruence, 9: congruence) Motive interaction Edge Concordant motives (mutualistic interaction of two motives over time) Positive edge Discordant/conflicting motives (competitive interaction of two motives over time) Negative edge Concordance / Discordance Summary statistics of edge weights in the network (e.g., negative edge weights divided by all edge weights; see methods section) Lüdtke, Steiner, Berger, & Westermann 5 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ and did not report any mental disorder. The ethics committee of the Faculty of Human Sciences at the University of Bern approved the study (#2016-05-00006). The present study was part of a larger project (Lüdtke & Westermann, 2023). Sample size considerations were based on recommendations for multilevel modelling (Maas & Hox, 2005) given the nested data structure of repeated measurements within participants. The target sample size was set to n = 50 level two cases (i.e., participants) to avoid biased estimates of second-level standard errors (Maas & Hox, 2005). No stopping rule for data collection was applied. Given that our initial power analysis focused on maximizing level two cases, the number of data points within participants (up to 36 assessments) was limited when compared to recommendations for within-person network estimation (Mansueto et al., 2023). Procedures Assessments were conducted between August and November 2016. All participants pro­ vided written informed consent prior to participation. The baseline assessment consis­ ted of an online survey as well as a face-to-face meeting. The online survey covered sociodemographic and clinical variables, approach- and avoidance motives, as well as subclinical depressive symptoms (see Baseline Measures section). During the face-to-face meeting, participants received a study smartphone and were instructed to carry it with them for six consecutive days. All functions of the smartphones were disabled except for the ESM survey application ‘movisensXS’, version 0.8.4211 (movisens GmbH, Germany). Measures Baseline Measures The German version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21; Nilges & Essau, 2015) was used to measure subclinical depressive symptoms. Participants rated how much each item applied to them over the past week (e.g., “I felt that life was meaning­ less”), with response options ranging from not at all to very much, or most of the time on a four-point scale. Internal consistencies ranged from α = .79 for the anxiety subscale to α = .87 for the depression subscale in the present sample. The DASS-21 can be used both in clinical and non-clinical samples (Antony et al., 1998). The Inventory of Approach and Avoidance Motivation (IAAM; Grosse Holtforth & Grawe, 2000) measures the importance of motives from not at all to extremely important. The questionnaire was developed in a ‘bottom-up’ process based on patients’ case formu­ lations (Grosse Holtforth, 2008) covering 14 approach- and nine avoidance motives on 94 items. For approach motives, internal consistencies range from .62 (self-reward) to .90 (affiliation) in psychology students (Grosse Holtforth & Grawe, 2000). Whereas the IAAM measures motive importance, the incongruence questionnaire (INC; Grosse Holtforth & Grawe, 2003) measures the extent to which motives are Motive Networks 6 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ implemented/satisfied in participants’ interactions with their environment (recoded to represent the degree of incongruence). Internal consistencies of INC subscales range from .71 to .89 in healthy participants (Grosse Holtforth & Grawe, 2003). For the present study, only approach motives were considered. The short version of the scale (INC-S; Grosse Holtforth & Grawe, 2003) consists of one item per motive and was used in the ESM assessment phase (see ESM Assessments section). ESM Assessments Participants completed six assessments of momentary motive satisfaction per day, for a period of six days, resulting in a maximum of 36 assessments per participant. Entries were defined as missing if they were dismissed, ignored, discontinued, or completed more than 30 minutes after the prompt. Each ESM assessment comprised 36 items. ESM assessments occurred at pseudo-random times between 9:30 a.m. and 9:30 p.m. with a minimum inter-assessment distance of 60 minutes. In addition, we offered the possibility to access the ESM assessment manually in case of a missed prompt. Each ESM assessment took approximately one minute to answer. Participants completed a total of 1,481 assessments, of which 1,406 assessments were prompted by the smartphone (95%), whereas 75 assessments were manually accessed by the participant within 30 minutes after a missed/ignored prompt (5%). Full adherence would have resulted in 36 x 51 = 1,836 datapoints, so 1,481 assessments correspond to 81% adherence. On average, participants responded to a prompt after 301 seconds (SD = 427 seconds, range = 1 to 1761 seconds, Median = 27 seconds). The distribution was skewed with half of the responses occurring within the first 30 seconds after the prompt. Most participants (n = 48; 94%) used the study smartphone for 6 days as intended. After completing the ESM phase, participants returned the study smartphones and completed a debriefing session. Motive satisfaction was assessed six times per day using the short version of the Incongruence Questionnaire (INC-S; Grosse Holtforth & Grawe, 2003). We made slight adjustments to the INC-S. First, a ten-point Likert scale was administered to allow for a more fine-grained assessment of motive satisfaction while retaining the endpoints of the scale. Second, we adjusted the wording to capture momentary motive satisfaction rather than general motive satisfaction: “Below you will find a list of different pleasant and unpleasant experiences. Please indicate how sufficiently you have been able to realize the more pleasant ones since the last survey (part 1) and how much the more unpleasant ones apply to you since the last survey (part 2)” (translated from German). The internal consistency of approach motive satisfaction has been reported as good (.84; Grosse Holtforth & Grawe, 2003) and the correlation between the short and the long version of the INC was high in the present sample (r = .62, p < .001), illustrating the validity of the INC-S in the ESM setting (for both scales, the seven most important motives based on the IAAM were used). Lüdtke, Steiner, Berger, & Westermann 7 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ The INC-S was accompanied by a short version of the Positive and Negative Affect Scales (PANAS; Watson et al., 1988), as well as items on the situational context (see Lüdtke & Westermann, 2023). We used only one of the PANAS items in exploratory analyses to examine the effect of momentary motive satisfaction on concurrent sadness, namely “In the present moment, I feel…” with the response options ranging from unhap­ py to happy on a seven-point scale. Analyses First, we computed idiographic networks of motive satisfaction separately for each par­ ticipant. To do so, we identified the seven most important motives that participants endorsed in the IAAM and entered the corresponding INC-S items into a network. Selecting the most important motives per participant ensured that potential motive conflicts were personally relevant and it helped to reduce model complexity (i.e., fewer nodes), which is recommended for low numbers of observations (Mansueto et al., 2023). Conceptually, the resulting networks represented concordant or discordant interactions (i.e., edges) between the satisfaction of idiosyncratically relevant motives (i.e., nodes) within a participant across the ESM period. Hence, a positive edge indicated that the satisfaction of one motive was accompanied by the concomitant satisfaction of another motive, whereas a negative edge indicated that whenever one motive was satisfied, another motive was less satisfied. Network estimation was conducted using the mlVAR package in R, version 0.5.1 We computed contemporaneous networks, which indicate how the satisfaction of one motive is associated with the satisfaction of another goal at the same time (i.e., partial correlations). The mlVAR package estimates these networks by extracting the residuals of time-lagged temporal models based on non-correlated random effects. Model estimation relied on linear mixed effects (lmer), the contemporaneous network estimation was set to “orthogonal”, without prior standardization. Node-specific fit indices provided are presented in the Supplementary Materials. In the second step of the analysis, we extracted network parameters on motive concordance versus discordance from each model and examined their association with subclinical depressive symptoms on a group level (i.e., between persons). First, we calcu­ lated the proportion of negative edges relative to total edge strength in the network, henceforth referred to as conflict proportion. To do so, we added up the absolute values of negative edge weights and divided them by the absolute values of all edge weights. The resulting index of discordance can be interpreted as the proportion of conflicting edge strength relative to the overall strength of edges within the network. Additionally, we ex­ tracted the strongest negative edge from each network, referred to as maximum conflict, as well as the strongest positive edge, referred to as the maximum concordance. The ra­ 1) CRAN link: http://cran.r-project.org/package=mlVAR Github link (developmental): http://www.github.com/SachaEpskamp/mlVAR Motive Networks 8 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 http://cran.r-project.org/package=mlVAR http://www.github.com/SachaEpskamp/mlVAR https://www.psychopen.eu/ tionale for estimating the maximum conflict parameter was that one strong motivational conflict may have detrimental consequences because the conflicting motives cannot both be satisfied at the same time, resulting in over-active motives with ongoing activity and an overall lower level of congruence (e.g., Boudreaux & Ozer, 2013). For example, while autonomy and affiliation are in conflict, the self-esteem motive has fewer opportunities to become satisfied. The rationale for the maximum concordance parameter was that one strong concordant relationship between important motives allows for efficient behavior that results in high decreases of incongruence. Network parameters of motive discordance and concordance were then used to pre­ dict subclinical depressive symptoms (DASS-D; Nilges & Essau, 2015) in OLS regression models. Motive satisfaction across the ESM period (INC-S; Grosse Holtforth & Grawe, 2003) was added as a covariate to all models. A check of model assumptions revealed that the outcome was skewed due to a large proportion of participants reporting hardly any subclinical depressive symptoms, and a visual inspection of residuals indicated problems with heteroscedasticity and non-normality. As a log-transformation could not resolve the issue, we resorted to bias-corrected and accelerated (BCa) bootstrap confidence intervals and corresponding p-values (based on 5000 samples), which are robust to violations of assumptions, such as non-normality (Field, 2009, p. 163). All tests were two-sided with conventional p-values of .05. Following confirmatory analyses, we conducted an exploratory linear mixed model (LMM) analysis to examine the moment-to-moment effects of motive satisfaction on concurrent mood. LMM allowed us to examine how the level of motive satisfaction, that is (in)congruence, relates to momentary affective states measured concomitantly. Thus, the LMM analyses answered the question whether – within participants – a moment in which motives were more strongly satisfied was associated with better mood as compared to a moment in which motives were less satisfied (and vice versa). LMM analyses account for the clustering of time points nested within individuals (Twisk, 2019, p. 150). The model included a random intercept, and it relied on maximum likelihood estimation. Averaged as well as momentary person-mean-centered motive satisfaction were entered as predictors (a so-called hybrid model; Twisk, 2019, p. 139). Results Participant Characteristics and Adherence A priori it was determined that participants with fewer than 12 completed assessments (i.e., 33%) would be excluded from analyses. Out of n = 55 participants, four (7%) completed less than 12 timely ESM assessments, leaving n = 51 participants. Baseline characteristics are presented in Table 2. Lüdtke, Steiner, Berger, & Westermann 9 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ Table 2 Baseline Characteristics (n = 51) Baseline Characteristic Age; M (SD) 21.8 (2.1) Gender; female/male 45/6 Years of education; M (SD) 14.3 (1.8) DASS-21-D; M (SD) 1.6 (0.6) Note. DASS-21-D = DASS-21 depression subscale. Importance, Satisfaction and Conflict of Motives The motives that were most often represented in the idiographic networks were ‘confi­ dence’ and ‘variety’ (both part of 43 idiographic networks; 78%), followed by ‘intimacy’ (76%), ‘autonomy’ (65%), and ‘self-reward’ (64%). The ‘status’ goal was the least promi­ nent, as it was represented only in one idiographic network (2%). The mean-ratings in the IAAM support the importance of the aforementioned motives, with ‘self-confidence’ receiving the highest average rating (M = 4.28 on the 5-point scale, SD = 0.51), followed by ‘autonomy’ (M = 4.21, SD = 0.53) and ‘intimacy’ (M = 4.20, SD = 0.65), whereas ‘status’ received the lowest rating (M = 2.47, SD = 0.56). Across the ESM period, the motive with the highest grand-mean satisfaction was autonomy (M = 7.18 on the 10-point scale, SD = 1.95), followed by control (M = 7.03, SD = 1.87). However, a variance component analysis (‘null model’) revealed that participants differed significantly in terms of motive satisfaction across the ESM-period (Wald Z tests: p’s < .001). Figure 1 depicts four exemplary idiographic motive networks. Across the sample, motives were mostly concordant, with an average conflict propor­ tion of 6.2% (SD = 6.7%; range = 0 to 29%). Of note, n = 10 participants showed no conflict at all, and the distribution was skewed due to low values. For maximum conflict, the resulting distribution was skewed towards zero as well, with a mean of r = -.09 (SD = .09; range: 0 to -.33). Exemplary time series of motivational conflict versus cooperation are presented in the Supplementary Materials. Associations Between Motive Concordance as Well as Discordance and Subclinical Depressive Symptoms We conducted three linear regression analyses (see Table 3). The first model examined whether the conflict proportion predicted subclinical depressive symptom severity, whereas the remaining two models examined the effect of the maximum conflict and maximum concordance, respectively. In all models, motive satisfaction was entered as a covariate. Motive Networks 10 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ Figure 1 Four Exemplary Idiographic Motive Networks Notes. Network graphs of four participants are depicted for illustrative purposes. Green lines (i.e., edges) represent concordant relationships between motives whereas red lines represent discordant relationships. The thickness of edges is determined by the strength of the association. Motive network A (Participant 72) depicts uniformly positive edges, indicating no conflict, motive network B (Participant 71) depicts multiple moderately negative edges (29% conflict proportion), motive network C (Participant 41) shows few but strong negative edges (-.33 maximum conflict), and motive network D shows a case of maximum concordance (.61 maximum concordance). Contrary to our hypotheses, neither conflict proportion nor maximum conflict predicted subclinical depressive symptoms (see Table 3). In contrast, the maximum concordance predicted subclinical depressive symptoms in that higher maximum concordance was as­ sociated with reduced subclinical depressive symptoms in models using robust bootstrap­ ping. Motive satisfaction, which was added as a covariate, was a significant predictor of subclinical depressive symptoms across models in that more satisfaction was associated with less subclinical depressive symptoms. Lüdtke, Steiner, Berger, & Westermann 11 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ Table 3 Network-Derived Motive Satisfaction, Concordance and Discordance as Predictors of Subclinical Depressive Symptoms Predictor b SE t (df) p Bootstrap 95%-CI; p Motive satisfaction -0.139 0.059 2.358 (48) .023 [-0.258, -0.013]; p = .047 Proportion of negative edges 0.374 1.269 0.295 (48) .770 [-2.341, 3.014]; p = .792 Motive satisfaction -0.167 0.057 2.921 (48) .005 [-0.286, -0.052]; p = .012 Most negative edge 0.995 0.940 1.058 (48) .295 [-0.517, 2.405]; p = .198 Motive satisfaction -0.165 0.054 3.072 (48) .003 [-0.285, -0.051]; p = .008 Most positive edge -1.136 0.643 1.765 (48) .084 [-2.119, -0.038]; p = .021 Note. Intercept coefficients not displayed; due to heteroskedasticity and non-normality of residuals, Bootstrap confidence intervals and p-values are provided. Exploratory Analyses It was surprising that the maximum concordance was associated with subclinical depres­ sive symptoms whereas the maximum conflict was not. Our conjecture was that the null effects regarding motivational conflict might be related to a lack of discordant motivational relations (and thus variance). When we excluded participants from the analyses who displayed not one subclinical depressive symptom or motive-conflict (n = 15), maximum conflict was associated with subclinical depressive symptoms according to bootstrapping (b = 1.744, 95% Bootstrap-CI [0.054, 3.329]), but not conventional signifi­ cance testing (p = .131). Tentatively, these findings suggest that a lack of variance may have contributed to null results at least partly and that it may be worthwhile to examine effect of maximum conflict in participants who display more motive conflicts. Confirmatory analyses indicated that participants with higher average motive satis­ faction across the six-day ESM period reported lower subclinical depressive symptoms. Possibly, this effect emerged because motive satisfaction was immediately related to positive mood on a moment-to-moment level. Thus, we examined whether momentary within-person fluctuations of motive satisfaction were associated with contemporane­ ous affect (i.e., unhappy to happy) in a LMM analysis. The model controlled for the mean level of motive satisfaction (i.e., a ‘hybrid model’) to disentangle between- from within-person variance. Results suggested that, on a within-person level, an increase in motive satisfaction predicted more happiness (fixed effect: b = 0.406, SE = .024, p < .001), meaning that when a person felt that their motives were satisfied more than usually, they felt in fact happier. Motive Networks 12 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ Discussion The present study demonstrated the feasibility and, in part, the clinical utility of a novel network-based approach to quantifying motive concordance and discordance in participants’ everyday lives using Experience Sampling. Adherence (81%) was relatively high compared to other ESM studies (e.g., 76.8% in psychosis research; Deakin et al., 2022), and only four participants had to be excluded because of too few assessments. These data suggest that the proposed ESM-based motive network approach could be a feasible tool for therapists to learn about patients’ idiographic motivational conflicts in order to aid treatment planning. The clinical utility of the derived indices of concordance and discordance was supported partly, as higher maximum concordance (i.e., strong concordant relationships between at least two motives) and overall motive satisfaction were associated with reduced subclinical depressive symptoms whereas motive conflicts were not. In terms of validity, the assessment method has proven to be promising because the correlation between trait incongruence assessed via self-report and the average incongruence in daily life was high but not redundant (r = .62). Visual representations of aggregated motive conflict (Figure 1) could serve as valuable sources of information for both therapists and patients. Inter-individual differences in idiographic network com­ position and everyday-life motive satisfaction support the usefulness of the idiographic approach. Whereas network-derived concordance may be a protective factor, motivational con­ flicts showed no associations with subclinical depressive symptoms. It is possible that null effects were the result of the low number of observations within participants (i.e., 36 given full adherence) in combination with a low probability of occurrence of motivational discordance in the healthy student sample. A clinical sample would likely increase the likelihood of detecting more severe motive conflicts, which might be better suited to predict depressive symptoms. For example, edges and centrality strength show stronger correlations between internalizing symptom networks from the same popula­ tion than between networks from clinical versus non-clinical samples (Funkhouser et al., 2020). Alternatively, when explaining the null finding one has to take into account that incongruence and discordance overlap empirically and theoretically, because discordance actually results in incongruence. Therefore, testing that discordance explains variance in depressive symptoms over and above incongruence is particularly conservative. Finally, an alternative psychological explanation for the null finding is, of course, that the motive conflicts that are related to depression are not captured with our network operationaliza­ tion of motive conflict (e.g., due to motive incongruence not being consciously accessible due to avoidance motives and/or defense mechanisms). Lüdtke, Steiner, Berger, & Westermann 13 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ The Role of Motive Satisfaction ESM-derived motive satisfaction emerged as a significant predictor of subclinical depres­ sive symptoms across models. Interestingly, exploratory post hoc analyses suggest that momentary fluctuations in approach motive satisfaction were associated with momenta­ ry happiness. This result is in line with theoretical accounts of approach and avoidance motivation (Carver & Scheier, 2000), and it adds to findings that a lack of motive satisfaction is associated with reduced well-being, self-esteem, or joie de vivre (Grosse Holtforth & Grawe, 2003) between persons but also on a moment-to-moment level. In addition, this finding provides further evidence for the importance of resource activation in psychotherapy and a salutogenetic perspective on mental health in general (e.g., Munder et al., 2019). Consequently, the clinical utility of the assessment might lie in the identification of how an individual motive network can be driven to more concordance during psychotherapy. Limitations and Future Directions First, the number of observations was low. Even 75 or 100 assessments are associated with low sensitivity (Mansueto et al., 2023), so 36 assessments in the present sample may have been too few to reliably estimate network parameters. However, we have made several design choices that were aimed at reducing the impact of small numbers of observations (Mansueto et al., 2023), namely limiting the number of nodes by selecting the seven most important motives per person, constraining analyses to contemporaneous networks, and using full information maximum likelihood estimation. One might argue that a more robust measure of motive interactions, such as simple correlations between motives, would be more appropriate. We decided against this option because, conceptual­ ly, the isolated relationship between two motives is not as informative as the interplay of all motives, which is illustrated by the fact that motivational (in)congruence is as­ sessed using a combination of all approach and avoidance motives, respectively (Grosse Holtforth & Grawe, 2003). Unlike simple correlations, partial correlation networks repre­ sent associations between two nodes while controlling for all other information possible (Epskamp & Fried, 2018), which we consider a much more appropriate representation of overall concordance/discordance among motives. Second, the student sample was educated, healthy, and mostly unaffected by motiva­ tional conflict according to our approach, resulting in skewed data and non-normally distributed errors. We addressed these issues with robust bootstrapping procedures but could not overcome the conceptual problem of floor effects. Third, the method of motive networks must be critically discussed. A motive network is based on an individual’s transaction with their environment. A conflict between motives might occur due to motive-related conflicts, but also due to challenges imposed by the environment, a skill deficit, or a combination of such factors. In the current study, it is not possible to Motive Networks 14 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ partition those sources of variance, and it would be worthwhile to qualitatively assess how conflicts emerged and how they were experienced by participants in future studies. Fourth, the theoretical framework we drew upon – consistency theory (Grawe, 2004) – is only one amongst many that are capable of informing motive conflicts. In the domain of psychodynamics, there are many theories that address motives and conflicts between motives. For example, the two-polarities model of personality development (Blatt, 2007) assumes two motivational processes: interpersonal relatedness and self-def­ inition. In this model, psychopathology such as a depressive disorder can stem from a too strong focus on one of these processes accompanied by a neglect of the other. However, if one motivational process is active and the other is inactive all the time – in contrast to alternating activity –, there is no variance to be captured as motive conflict in experience sampling data. Thus, the theoretical perspective adopted here, and the resulting operationalization cannot capture the entirety of motive conflicts, limiting the interpretation of the findings. Lastly, the slightly adapted version of the INC-S which we used to assess congruence in daily life was not validated prior to the study. There are several avenues for future research. First, the convergent validity of motive networks could be assessed using other data sources such as clinical interviews (e.g., OPD; Arbeitskreis zur Operationalisierung Psychodynamischer Diagnostik, 2023). Sec­ ond, the test-retest reliability could be determined through repeated experience sampling phases (e.g., a month apart). Lastly, the qualitative evaluation of motive networks could be achieved by interviewing participants about their personal motive networks (e.g., individual concordant and conflicting pairs of motives and their face validity for the interviewees). Lüdtke, Steiner, Berger, & Westermann 15 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://www.psychopen.eu/ Funding: Stefan Westermann received funding from the UniBE initiator grant. The study did not receive further funding. The funding had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Acknowledgments: The authors have no additional (i.e., non-financial) support to report. Competing Interests: We have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Ethics Statement: This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The ethics committee of the Faculty of Human Sciences at the University of Bern approved the study (#2016-05-00006). All participants provided written informed consent prior to participation. Preregistration: The study was not pre-registered. Reporting Guidelines: The manuscript was prepared in accordance with the JARS-Quant guidelines for quantitative research. An overview of approach motives as well as fit indices of the network’s nodes are provided in the Supplementary Materials. Data Availability: The data that support the findings of this study as well as the code are available from the corresponding author, Stefan Westermann, upon reasonable request. Supplementary Materials The supplement contains a table which lists all approach motives that were assessed in the present study including respective Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs), a table with fit indices for each node of the idiographic network models, as well as a figure with exemplary depictions of congruence of the autonomy and the affiliation motive over time for two participants (for access, see Lüdtke et al., 2025S). Index of Supplementary Materials Lüdtke, T., Steiner, F., Berger, T., & Westermann, S. (2025S). Supplementary materials to "Empirically informed, idiographic networks of concordant and discordant motives: An experience sampling study with network analysis in non-clinical participants" [Additional information]. PsychOpen GOLD. https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.16213 References Antony, M. M., Bieling, P. J., Cox, B. J., Enns, M. W., & Swinson, R. P. (1998). Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychological Assessment, 10(2), 176–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.10.2.176 Motive Networks 16 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.16213 https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.10.2.176 https://www.psychopen.eu/ Arbeitskreis zur Operationalisierung Psychodynamischer Diagnostik (Ed.). (2023). OPD-3 – Operationalisierte Psychodynamische Diagnostik: Das Manual für Diagnostik und Therapieplanung (1. Auflage). Hogrefe. Bak, M., Drukker, M., Hasmi, L., & van Os, J. (2016). An n=1 clinical network analysis of symptoms and treatment in psychosis. PLoS One, 11(9), Article e0162811. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162811 Beard, C., Millner, A. J., Forgeard, M. J. C., Fried, E. I., Hsu, K. J., Treadway, M. T., Leonard, C. V., Kertz, S. J., & Björgvinsson, T. (2016). Network analysis of depression and anxiety symptom relationships in a psychiatric sample. Psychological Medicine, 46(16), 3359–3369. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291716002300 Ben-Zeev, D., & Young, M. A. (2010). Accuracy of hospitalized depressed patients’ and healthy controls’ retrospective symptom reports: An experience sampling study. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 198(4), 280–285. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0b013e3181d6141f Berking, M., Grosse Holtforth, M., & Jacobi, C. (2003). Reduction of incongruence in inpatient psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 10(2), 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.357 Blanco, C., Kampe, L., Wall, M. M., Liu, S.-M., Wang, S., Caligor, E., & Olfson, M. (2023). Approximating defense mechanisms in a national study of adults: Prevalence and correlates with functioning. Translational Psychiatry, 13(1), Article 21. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-022-02303-3 Blatt, S. J. (2007). A fundamental polarity in psychoanalysis: Implications for personality development, psychopathology, and the therapeutic process. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 26(4), 494– 520. https://doi.org/10.1080/07351690701310581 Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D. J., & Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323(5916), 892–895. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165821 Borsboom, D. (2017). A network theory of mental disorders. World Psychiatry, 16(1), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20375 Borsboom, D., Deserno, M. K., Rhemtulla, M., Epskamp, S., Fried, E. I., McNally, R. J., Robinaugh, D. J., Perugini, M., Dalege, J., Costantini, G., Isvoranu, A.-M., Wysocki, A. C., van Borkulo, C. D., van Bork, R., & Waldorp, L. J. (2021). Network analysis of multivariate data in psychological science. Nature Reviews. Methods Primers, 1(1), Article 58. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-021-00055-w Boudreaux, M. J., & Ozer, D. J. (2013). Goal conflict, goal striving, and psychological well-being. Motivation and Emotion, 37(3), 433–443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-012-9333-2 Brockmeyer, T., Holtforth, M. G., Krieger, T., Altenstein, D., Doerig, N., Zimmermann, J., Backenstrass, M., Friederich, H.-C., & Bents, H. (2015). Preliminary evidence for a nexus between rumination, behavioural avoidance, motive satisfaction and depression. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 22(3), 232–239. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.1885 Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2000). On the structure of behavioral self-regulation. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 41–84). Elsevier. Lüdtke, Steiner, Berger, & Westermann 17 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162811 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291716002300 https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0b013e3181d6141f https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.357 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-022-02303-3 https://doi.org/10.1080/07351690701310581 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165821 https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20375 https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-021-00055-w https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-012-9333-2 https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.1885 https://www.psychopen.eu/ https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50032-9https://doi.org/10.1016/ B978-012109890-2/50032-9 Caspar, F. (1997). Plan analysis. In T. D. Eells (Ed.), Handbook of psychotherapy case formulation (pp. 260–288). Guilford Press. Christensen, A. P., & Kenett, Y. N. (2023). Semantic network analysis (SemNA): A tutorial on preprocessing, estimating, and analyzing semantic networks. Psychological Methods, 28(4), 860– 879. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000463 Coats, E. J., Janoff-Bulman, R., & Alpert, N. (1996). Approach versus avoidance goals: Differences in self-evaluation and well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(10), 1057–1067. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672962210009 Deakin, E., Ng, F., Young, E., Thorpe, N., Newby, C., Coupland, C., Craven, M., & Slade, M. (2022). Design decisions and data completeness for experience sampling methods used in psychosis: Systematic review. BMC Psychiatry, 22(1), Article 669. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-04319-x Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self- determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 Eells, T. D. (Ed.). (2007). Handbook of psychotherapy case formulation. Guilford Press. Epskamp, S., & Fried, E. I. (2018). A tutorial on regularized partial correlation networks. Psychological Methods, 23(4), 617–634. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000167 Ferster, C. B. (1973). A functional anlysis of depression. The American Psychologist, 28(10), 857–870. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035605 Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance (Reissued by Stanford Univ. Press in 1962, renewed 1985 by author). Stanford University Press. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). SAGE. Fried, E. I., van Borkulo, C. D., Cramer, A. O. J., Boschloo, L., Schoevers, R. A., & Borsboom, D. (2017). Mental disorders as networks of problems: A review of recent insights. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 52(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-016-1319-z Funkhouser, C. J., Correa, K. A., Gorka, S. M., Nelson, B. D., Phan, K. L., & Shankman, S. A. (2020). The replicability and generalizability of internalizing symptom networks across five samples. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 129(2), 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000496 Gable, S. L. (2006). Approach and avoidance social motives and goals. Journal of Personality, 74(1), 175–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00373.x Grawe, K. (2004). Psychological therapy. Hogrefe Publishing. Gray, J. S., Ozer, D. J., & Rosenthal, R. (2017). Goal conflict and psychological well-being: A meta- analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 66, 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.12.003 Grosse Holtforth, M. (2008). Avoidance motivation in psychological problems and psychotherapy. Psychotherapy Research, 18(2), 147–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503300701765849 Motive Networks 18 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50032-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50032-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50032-9 https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000463 https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672962210009 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-04319-x https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000167 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035605 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-016-1319-z https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000496 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00373.x https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.12.003 https://doi.org/10.1080/10503300701765849 https://www.psychopen.eu/ Grosse Holtforth, M., & Grawe, K. (2000). Fragebogen zur Analyse Motivationaler Schemata (FAMOS). Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 29(3), 170–179. https://doi.org/10.1026//0084-5345.29.3.170 Grosse Holtforth, M., & Grawe, K. (2003). Der Inkongruenzfragebogen (INK). Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 32(4), 315–323. https://doi.org/10.1026/0084-5345.32.4.315 Grosse Holtforth, M., & Grawe, K. (2004). Inkongruenz und Fallkonzeption in der Psychologischen Therapie [Incongruence and case formulation in psyschological therapy.]. Verhaltenstherapie & Psychosoziale Praxis, 36(1), 9–21. Kihlstrom, J. F. (2021). Ecological validity and “ecological validity”. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(2), 466–471. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966791 Larson, R., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). The experience sampling method. In M. Csikszentmihalyi (Ed.), Flow and the foundations of positive psychology (pp. 21–34). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9088-8_2https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9088-8_2 Lewinsohn, P. M. (1974). A behavioral approach to depression. In R. J. Freedman & M. Katz (Eds.), The psychology of depression (pp. 157-174). Wiley. Lewinsohn, P. M., & Graf, M. (1973). Pleasant activities and depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 41(2), 261–268. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035142 Lewinsohn, P. M., & Libet, J. (1972). Pleasant events, activity schedules, and depressions. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 79(3), 291–295. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033207 Lüdtke, T., & Westermann, S. (2023). Negative expectations regarding interpersonal interactions in daily life are associated with subclinical depressive symptoms in a student sample: A prospective experience sampling study. Motivation and Emotion, 47(1), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-022-09985-8 Maas, C. J. M., & Hox, J. J. (2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 1(3), 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.1.3.86 Mansueto, A. C., Wiers, R. W., van Weert, J. C. M., Schouten, B. C., & Epskamp, S. (2023). Investigating the feasibility of idiographic network models. Psychological Methods, 28(5), 1052– 1068. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000466 Molenaar, P. C. M. (2004). A manifesto on psychology as idiographic science: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 2(4), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15366359mea0204_1 Moritz, S., & Woodward, T. S. (2007). Metacognitive training in schizophrenia: From basic research to knowledge translation and intervention. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 20(6), 619–625. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0b013e3282f0b8ed Munder, T., Karcher, A., Yadikar, Ö., Szeles, T., & Gumz, A. (2019). Focusing on patients’ existing resources and strengths in cognitive-behavioral therapy and psychodynamic therapy: A Lüdtke, Steiner, Berger, & Westermann 19 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://doi.org/10.1026//0084-5345.29.3.170 https://doi.org/10.1026/0084-5345.32.4.315 https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966791 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9088-8_2 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9088-8_2 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035142 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033207 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-022-09985-8 https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.1.3.86 https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000466 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15366359mea0204_1 https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0b013e3282f0b8ed https://www.psychopen.eu/ systematic review and meta-analysis. Zeitschrift für Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychotherapie, 65(2), 144–161. https://doi.org/10.13109/zptm.2019.65.2.144 Nilges, P., & Essau, C. (2015). Die Depressions-Angst-Stress-Skalen: Der DASS – ein Screeningverfahren nicht nur für Schmerzpatienten [Depression, anxiety and stress scales: DASS—A screening procedure not only for pain patients]. Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 29(6), 649–657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00482-015-0019-z Robinaugh, D. J., Hoekstra, R. H. A., Toner, E. R., & Borsboom, D. (2020). The network approach to psychopathology: A review of the literature 2008-2018 and an agenda for future research. Psychological Medicine, 50(3), 353–366. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291719003404 Scholten, S., Lischetzke, T., & Glombiewski, J. A. (2022). Integrating theory-based and data-driven methods to case conceptualization: A functional analysis approach with ecological momentary assessment. Psychotherapy Research, 32(1), 52–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2021.1916639 Schultheiss, O. C., & Brunstein, J. C. (2005). An implicit motive perspective on competence. In A. J. Elliot, C. S. Dweck, & M. V. Covington (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 31– 51). Guilford Publications. Struijs, S. Y., Lamers, F., Rinck, M., Roelofs, K., Spinhoven, P., & Penninx, B. W. J. H. (2018). The predictive value of Approach and Avoidance tendencies on the onset and course of depression and anxiety disorders. Depression and Anxiety, 35(6), 551–559. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22760 Tabassum, S., Pereira, F. S. F., Fernandes, S., & Gama, J. (2018). Social network analysis: An overview. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 8(5), Article e1256. https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1256 Thonon, B., van Aubel, E., Lafit, G., Della Libera, C., & Larøi, F. (2020). Idiographic analyses of motivation and related processes in participants with schizophrenia following a therapeutic intervention for negative symptoms. BMC Psychiatry, 20(1), Article 464. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-02824-5 Twisk, J. W. R. (2019). Applied mixed model analysis. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635660https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635660 Urban, E. J., Charles, S. T., Levine, L. J., & Almeida, D. M. (2018). Depression history and memory bias for specific daily emotions. PLoS One, 13(9), Article e0203574. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203574 VuMa. (2023). Anzahl der Smartphone-Nutzer* in Deutschland in den Jahren 2009 bis 2021 (in Millionen). https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/198959/umfrage/anzahl-der-smartphonenutzer-in- deutschland-seit-2010/ Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 Westermann, S., Grosse Holtforth, M., & Michalak, J. (2019). Motivation in Psychotherapy. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of human motivation (2nd ed., pp. 415–442). Oxford University Press. Motive Networks 20 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://doi.org/10.13109/zptm.2019.65.2.144 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00482-015-0019-z https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291719003404 https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2021.1916639 https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22760 https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1256 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-02824-5 https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635660 https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635660 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203574 https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/198959/umfrage/anzahl-der-smartphonenutzer-in-deutschland-seit-2010/ https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/198959/umfrage/anzahl-der-smartphonenutzer-in-deutschland-seit-2010/ https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 https://www.psychopen.eu/ https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.23https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/ 9780190666453.013.23 Wichers, M., Groot, P. C., Psychosystems, ESM Group, & EWS Group. (2016). Critical slowing down as a personalized early warning signal for depression. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 85(2), 114–116. https://doi.org/10.1159/000441458 Clinical Psychology in Europe (CPE) is the official journal of the European Association of Clinical Psychology and Psychological Treatment (EACLIPT). PsychOpen GOLD is a publishing service by Leibniz Institute for Psychology (ZPID), Germany. Lüdtke, Steiner, Berger, & Westermann 21 Clinical Psychology in Europe 2025, Vol. 7(2), Article e12305 https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12305 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.23 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.23 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.23 https://doi.org/10.1159/000441458 https://www.psychopen.eu/ Motive Networks (Introduction) Theoretical Background Method Recruitment Procedures Measures Analyses Results Participant Characteristics and Adherence Importance, Satisfaction and Conflict of Motives Associations Between Motive Concordance as Well as Discordance and Subclinical Depressive Symptoms Exploratory Analyses Discussion The Role of Motive Satisfaction Limitations and Future Directions (Additional Information) Funding Acknowledgments Competing Interests Ethics Statement Preregistration Reporting Guidelines Data Availability Supplementary Materials References