Context: Introductory programming courses often face high dropout and failure rates, a challenge widely addressed in computing education research. Collaborative methods, such as group work and pair programming, have been proposed as potential solutions, as they are believed to enhance students' study motivation. Objective: This article provides a comprehensive overview of current research on the use of collaborative methods in introductory programming courses and their influence on students' study motivation. The focus lies at the intersection of collaborative learning approaches and study motivation. In addition, the article identifies gaps in the existing literature, highlighting areas in need of further investigation. Method: This study combines a systematic mapping study with a systematic literature review. A search for relevant articles was conducted across eight digital libraries in October 2020 using search strings that incorporated the concepts of CS1, collaborative methods, and motivation. Of the 991 initially retrieved articles, 86 were selected for in-depth analysis. Extracted data included publication details, research type, collaborative methods used, supporting tools/environments, the role of motivation, theoretical frameworks, motivational scales, reflections on collaborative methods, and aspects of collaborative methods that influenced motivation. Results: The findings reveal several noteworthy trends. First, 84% of the studies did not reference a theoretical framework for motivation, and 83% did not use established tools to measure it. Reflections on collaborative methods were predominantly positive (81%), while only 6% expressed negative views. Increased motivation was the most frequently reported benefit of collaborative learning approaches in our corpus, in which each paper had to at least include the term "motivation." Among the aspects of the collaborative setting reported to influence motivation, competition, collaboration, use of technology, and project work were mentioned in multiple studies. Conclusions: These results highlight the need for further research in several key areas. First, greater attention is required regarding the definition and measurement of motivation in this context, as indicated by the lack of theoretical frameworks and established measurement tools in most articles. Additionally, there is a need to develop a standardized taxonomy and clearer definitions for collaborative methods to facilitate more precise discussions and comparisons across studies. While the positive reflections on collaborative methods are encouraging, the limited number of negative reflections suggests a lack of attention to potential drawbacks or limitations. Finally, a research gap exists in understanding which specific aspects of the collaborative setting most significantly affect students' study motivation, underscoring the importance of continued exploration in this domain.