a b s t r a c tObjectives: The present study investigated the predictive value of the explicit and implicit affiliation motive for social behavior in sport competitions. From an information processing perspective, an explicit motive is linked to verbal cues and respondent behavior. The implicit motive in turn is linked to nonverbal stimuli and operant behavior (McClelland, Koestner, & Weinberger, 1989;Schultheiss, 2008). Both respondent affiliative behavior (e.g., verbal interactions with teammates) and operant nonverbal social behavior (e.g., pleasant to opponents) can be observed in racquet sports team competitions. Design & Methods: Fifty two male racquet sportsmen completed the Personality Research Form (explicit affiliation motive) and the Operant Motive Test (implicit affiliation motive). Motive measures were used to predict social behavior during competitions using multiple regression analyses. To this aim real competitive matches were videotaped and analyzed. Results: Results show that the explicit affiliation motive is associated with time spent in verbal team contact. The implicit affiliation motive, by contrast, is linked to pleasant nonverbal behavior shown to ward opponents. Conclusions: Findings suggest that implicit and explicit affiliation motives predict different kinds of social behavior in sports competition respectively. Indirect motive measures may be of additional predictive value for different behavior in real sports settings.Playing singles competitions in racquet sports is a very lonely endeavor for the players involved when it comes to social inter action during matches, personal responsibility for errors, or the need to travel alone. In contrast to singles competitions, there are team competitions in all three sports of tennis, badminton, and table tennis that leave much more space for social behavior. These team competitions are either national league, collegiate sport, or international competitions such as world championships, Olympic Games, or the Davis Cup in tennis. In tennis, for example, even the rules for social interaction in team competitions differ from the singles competitions. In tennis team competitions, social exchange with teammates or coaches is allowed during breaks. Athletes can talk to their teammates between rallies as well. In badminton, for example, a teammate is even allowed to sit right behind the player during the whole match. In addition to the interaction with opponents or referees commonly found in singles competitions, in team competitions the athlete has the opportu nity to explicitly interact with his teammate or coach throughout the match.In the present study, we were interested in whether athletes who usually compete alone and rely on themselves e without the help of any other teammate or coach e actually use this opportunity for social interaction during a racquet sports game. We investigated whether the social behavior shown in a match could be related to the strength of their implicit vs. explicit affiliation motives. This is particularly interestin...