This report reviews versions of testing expectancy theory predictions of individual choice behavior. The ipsative, normative and return on effort approaches are addressed as are the issues of conceptual, methodical and empirical problems associated with each approach. In order to test the hypotheses as to which approach would yield stronger expentancy theory predictions of work effort, 160 graduate and undergraduate students were administered a questionnaire regarding intentions and attitudes about studying on an anonymous and voluntary basis. It was found (1) that ipsative expectancy theory predictions of work effort were considerably better than normative correlations; (2) using a normative paradigm, return on effort zero-order correlations were superior to normative maximum benefit correlations; (3) using an ipsative paradigm, return on effort correlations were consistently superior to maximum benefit correlations. (YJR)