Motivation

Abstract

As a topic of interest for well over a century, motivation has been studied from multiple angles, including from physiological, instinctual, behavioral, psychoanalytical, and humanistic perspectives. As the field of psychology has become more cognitive in its orientation, however, so has research on motivation. The cognitive theories of motivation include: intrinsic motivation, goal theory, achievement motivation, attribution theory, and social cognitive theory. Their impact on achievement and learning will be discussed as well.

Overview

Educators and psychologists have been studying motivation for well over a century. As a result, it has been investigated from nearly every angle: physiological, behavioral, instinctual, psychoanalytical, and humanistic. In the last several decades, however, the field of psychology has become more cognitive in its orientation and so too has research on motivation. Learning theorists have begun to realize that motivation, like other mental processes such as attention, perception, and memory, is an important ingredient in the learning process and can help to explain both academic success and failure. Thus, cognitive theorists define motivation as "the process whereby goal-directed activity is instigated and sustained" (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). Even though motivation is defined as a cognitive construct, it is nonetheless something that must be inferred from behavior. Because researchers cannot directly measure motivation, cognitivists use behavioral indicators—such as persistence, task choice, and self-reports—to better understand why people are motivated to act as they do.

Although the way motivation works is only partially understood, many researchers have attempted to implement systems to control motivation in order to improve achievement in settings such as school and the workplace. Many such efforts draw on the various models developed within psychology and education studies, but others rely on flawed conceptions of scientific research or introduce unsubstantiated claims. Many companies rely on theories and techniques developed by motivation researchers in order to improve employee motivation or to conceptualize organizational structure and activity. Teachers also use motivation theories in efforts to stimulate learning among students. Limited research has even been conducted on the use of drugs to affect elements of brain chemistry that may be linked to motivation; these methods are highly experimental and unproven, however.

Sigmund Freud's Theory.Sigmund Freud developed a complex and intricate theory of personality, as well as a revolutionary method of therapy known as psychoanalysis. Although he did not use the same terminology, his concept of trieb (a German word meaning moving force), is similar in meaning to motivation. More specifically, Freud viewed motivation as psychic energy, part of a larger system of energy within an individual that he believed was closed; energy might change its form, but it never changes in amount. When a need develops, Freud proposed that energy was directed toward behaviors that satisfy a need; need reduction is pleasurable, he argued, because the build-up of energy is unpleasant. Although many times, energy is aimed toward reducing a particular need, Freud also believed it was often repressed. Repressed energy does not disappear, however, but rather manifests itself in other ways. In this view, sexual energy might result in overeating, for example.

The idea that individuals sometimes do not have access to thoughts that are influencing their behavior is arguably one of Freud's most significant contributions to our understanding of motivation and is mirrored in current theories regarding implicit motives. However, Freud elevated unconscious forces to unreasonable heights, many argue, and therefore disregarded the impact of cognitions and the environment; people do have conscious goals and values, the attainment of which is sometimes altered by forces beyond their control.

Drive Theory. Clark Hull, who became a well-known American psychologist in the early twentieth century for his work on hypnosis, became even better known for his contribution to drive theory. Approaching the question of motivation from a physiological perspective, Hull believed behavior comprised two elements: the actual performance, and the variables that determine performance. He identified these determining variables as habit strength—the strength of the association between a stimulus and response—and drive, or "the motivational construct energizing and prompting organisms into action" (Schunk, 1996). Hull argued that drive results primarily from physiological deficits; if an organism is hungry, drive will activate the organism to behave in ways to reduce the hunger. When the deficit is eliminated, drive subsides. Because much of human behavior is not directly related to survival needs, Hull introduced the notion of secondary reinforcers. Money, for example, is a secondary reinforcer because it allows individuals to buy shelter and food. Thus, secondary reinforcers, by being paired with reinforcers that satisfy primary physiological needs, influence behavior.

Even though Hull had tried to broaden his theory by introducing secondary reinforcement, many still felt it fell short, especially with regard to explaining human behavior. As Schunk (1996) argues, there are many times people will ignore a primary need—such as hunger—in order to attain a valued goal, such as winning a race or studying for an exam. In addition, people often strive for long-term goals over a period of months or years; drive theory adds little insight to this type of behavior.

Conditioning Theories. In the early twentieth century—and largely in reaction to Freud's emphasis on the unconscious and unobservable—behaviorism came into prominence. Behaviorists explained all learning in terms of observable events: stimuli in the environment and the responses those stimuli elicited. Many behaviorists denied the existence of so-called mental events altogether; those who did not nevertheless suggested they could not and should not be studied. Thus, motivation is understood in terms of probability and frequency of behavior, not as a cognitive construct. Many theories explained human learning from a behaviorist point of view, but two theories in particular, classical conditioning theory and operant conditioning theory, became the hallmark theories.

Classical Conditioning. Classical conditioning, first discovered by Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov, occurs when a previously neutral stimulus, upon being paired with an unconditioned stimulus, elicits a response. In the classic study, for example, Pavlov noticed that dogs salivated in the presence of food. Food served as an unconditioned stimulus that elicited an unconditioned response, salivation. When Pavlov then paired the sound of a bell (a neutral stimulus) with the presentation of the food, dogs soon learned to salivate in response to the bell alone. The bell then became a conditioned stimulus, the salivation in the presence of the bell a conditioned response. Schunk explains, "this is a passive view of motivation . . . because the motivational properties of the unconditioned stimulus are transmitted to the conditioned stimulus" (Schunk, 1996). In other words, it is assumed to be an automatic process.

Operant Conditioning.Operant conditioning also explains motivation in terms of relationships between stimuli and response. Proposed by B. F. Skinner, who is known as the father of behaviorism, operant conditioning explains behavior in terms of an antecedent stimulus, the behavior itself, and the consequences of behavior. The consequence—either positive or negative—determines the future likelihood the behavior will be exhibited again; a positive consequence increases the frequency of behavior, a negative consequence decreases the frequency of a behavior. According to Skinner, "operant conditioning requires no new principles to account for motivation. Motivated behavior is increased . . . by effective contingencies of reinforcement" (cited in Pintrich & Schunk, 2002).

Reinforcements do influence behavior. According to cognitive psychologists, however, it is a person's beliefs or expectations about the reinforcements that influence behavior as much, if not more so, than the reinforcements themselves. By ignoring these cognitive processes, such as expectation, beliefs, and memory, behaviorists "offer an incomplete account of human motivation" (Schunk, 1996).

Humanistic Theory.Abraham Maslow developed a humanistic theory of motivation; like many theorists before him, Maslow defined motivated behavior in relation to needs. Unlike drive theories, however, Maslow identified needs other than physiological or biological ones. He classified needs into a hierarchy of five categories:

• Physiological
• Safety
• Belongingness
• Esteem
• Self-actualization

According to Maslow, individuals must satisfy lower-order needs first, before attending to higher-order needs. For example, a person is unlikely to worry about achievement or recognition from others, which are classified as esteem needs, if they cannot meet their physiological needs for food and water. Maslow was most interested in the highest level of the hierarchy, or self-actualization needs, defined as "ongoing actualization of potentials, capacities and talents, and fulfillment of mission" (Maslow, 1968, as cited in Schunk, 1996). He believed self-actualization could be achieved in a variety of ways—one person might become self-actualized through athletic achievement, for example, another through parenting—but that only 1 percent of the population ever achieved it completely.

While many of Maslow's principles apply to our understanding of motivation in general, his theory has been difficult to validate empirically; research on self-actualization in particular, has yielded mixed results. In addition, operational definitions of deficiencies of needs have remained elusive; what one person experiences as a deficiency of belongingness needs, another may experience as an overabundance of love and connectedness.

Cognitive Theories of Motivation. The following section will highlight some of the prominent cognitive theories of motivation, including:

• Intrinsic motivation,
• Goal theory,
• Achievement motivation,
• Attribution theory
• Social cognitive theory of motivation.

Each theory has its own specific emphasis—some emphasize goal setting whereas others emphasize perceptions of control—but they are similar in their emphasis on cognitive processes.

Intrinsic Motivation. Intrinsic motivation is defined as motivation to engage in an activity for its own sake. It is often contrasted with extrinsic motivation, or motivation to engage in an activity as a means to an end (to earn a reward for example, or the recognition of others). With respect to learning, educators have long suspected that those who are intrinsically motivated are more likely to put forth greater effort, and more likely to achieve.

One of the more recent theories of intrinsic motivation is known as flow, or the psychology of optimal experience. Csikszentmihalyi (1990) did not intend to develop a theory of motivation or learning when he first started investigating flow; he simply want to understand "how people felt when they most enjoyed themselves, and why" (p. 4). What he discovered is that enjoyment is experienced by people in essentially the same way and that an enjoyable experience is, at its core, one that will help a person grow. The universal elements of enjoyment—the sum of which Csikszentmihalyi termed "flow"—include loss of self-consciousness, intense concentration, an increased sense of control, and a transformed sense of time. The activities themselves are typically ones that have clear goals and provide immediate feedback, and in which the challenge is met with an equal amount of skill. Finally, he argued, flow is maintained only when individuals seek increasingly higher levels of challenge that they then meet with increasingly higher levels of skill. In sum, "the flow experience acts as a magnet for learning" (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997).

Csikszentmihalyi's work follows a long line of research into intrinsic motivation. One of the earliest perspectives was proposed by White (1959, as cited in Schunk, 1996), who referred to intrinsic motivation as effectance motivation. Defined as an "inherent need to feel competent and interact effectively with the environment" (Puntrich & Schunk, 2002), White believed effectance motivation was a global construct that affected all activities equally; he focused primarily on the ways in which successful interaction with one's environment spurred development, and on its adaptive and evolutionary value. Harter (1981, as cited in Pintrich & Schunk, 2002) expanded White's original conceptualization, focusing on motivation in relation to both success and failure, and in relation to specific activities. Harter believes that an individual's perceived level of competence in a particular activity determines, in part, his or her level of motivation. Research using Hart's model has revealed that intrinsic motivation drops as children age; many suggested the drop might be fueled by an increase in extrinsic motivation, but no such evidence has been found. Thus, extrinsic and intrinsic motivation seem to operate independently of one another, such that an increase in one does not necessarily suggest a decrease in the other.

Goal & Goal Orientation Theory.Goal theory, as its name suggests, addresses the way in which different types of goals influence achievement. Research has uncovered two distinct types of goals, and although they have been given different labels across various studies, they are conceptually similar. Referred to as performance and learning goals—or simultaneously as task-focused and ability-focused, ego-involved and task-involved, or performance goals and mastery goals—they share many similarities with the notions of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Whereas extrinsic and intrinsic motivation are considered more trait-like, however, goal orientation is more context-dependent and situation-specific.

The type of goal a student adopts has an impact on both his subsequent behavior and the learning process itself. Those who choose mastery or learning goals tend to concentrate on learning strategies and processes that help them improve their skills. The focus is on developing skills, accomplishing something challenging, and learning according to self-standards of improvement. By contrast, those who adopt performance goals focus more on task completion, and less on the processes used to complete the task. Such students are more likely to be competitive, comparing their performance to others rather than to self-standards. Research has generally shown that students who adopt process or mastery goals achieve at higher levels than those who adopt performance goals, regardless of the frequency of feedback from instructors. The type of feedback a student receives, however, can impact which type of goal a student chooses; feedback about qualitative aspects of a skill, rather than outcomes-based feedback, helps students become more task and mastery oriented as opposed to performance or ego oriented.

Achievement Motivation.Achievement motivation refers to a person's motivation to perform difficult tasks to the best of their ability. Theories of achievement motivation are also known as expectancy-value theories of motivation because they suggest that behavior can be explained in relation to two variables: how much an individual values a particular outcome, and their expectation (e.g. likelihood) of attaining that outcome as a result of their behavior. As the first theory of achievement motivation, Atkinson's (1978, as cited in Schunk, 1996) expectancy-value theory helped shift motivation research away from behaviorist S-R models, toward an understanding of the role of perceptions and beliefs.

Later expectancy-value theories have incorporated a number of other cognitive and environmental variables into explanatory models of achievement motivation. Eccles's (1983, as cited in Schunk, 1996) model, for example, incorporated the impact of cultural factors and past performance, as well as goals and perceptions of ability. More specifically, Eccles proposed that expectations of success are influenced by task-specific self-concepts, or an individual's perceptions of ability or competence in a specific domain. An individual might have a favorable self-concept with regard to English, but a less favorable self-concept with regard to math. Similarly, an individual's interpretation of her past performance might affect her future expectations of success; if she thinks she performed well as a result of luck, for example, she might not expect future success. Finally, Eccles recognized that the value of an outcome—or the answer to the question "Why should I engage in this task?"—could also be impacted by cognitive and environmental variables. A person might choose to engage in a particular task, for example, because they find it intrinsically rewarding, or because it is valued by the culture in which he or she lives.

Attribution Theory. Attributions are the explanations people give for causes of behavior. Early attribution research focused on locus of control; Rotter (1966, as cited in Schunk, 1996) suggested that people either believe outcomes are unrelated to behavior (an external locus of control) or that outcomes are dependent on behavior (an internal locus of control). Perceptions of control are believed to affect achievement, such that students who believe they have control over outcomes are more likely to engage in academic tasks. Similarly, Heider (1958, as cited in Schunk, 1996) suggested that people typically do not know what causes behavior; his naïve analysis of action theory suggested people attribute causes to internal factors and external factors, and that expectations of success were dependent on the interaction between the two.

Weiner (1971, as cited in Schunk, 1996) developed an attribution model that built upon the work of Rotter and Heider. He suggested that when students attempt to explain their successes and failures in academic settings, they typically attribute them to one of four causes: ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck. These attributions exist along three different dimensions: external vs. internal, stable vs. unstable, and controllable vs. uncontrollable. Effort, for example, is internal but unstable; it varies across different tasks. It is also controllable, such that a person can choose to put forth greater or less effort. The stability dimension is believed to affect expectations of success; those who attribute success to stable causes such as effort and ability are more likely to expect future success. The locus of control dimension influences affect; students who attribute failure to external causes, for example, are less likely to feel shame than if they attributed failure to lack of ability. Some research suggests attributions may vary by gender and ethnicity—some studies have found girls are more likely to attribute failure to internal causes and success to external causes, for example—but the results have been inconsistent and inconclusive to date. Nevertheless, attribution theory has far-reaching applications; it has been used to study everything from success in a foreign language classroom to romantic jealousy in dating relationships.

Social Cognitive Theory. The social cognitive theory of motivation was developed by Albert Bandura and emphasizes the importance of goals and expectations in learning. Bandura proposed that people set goals and then self-evaluate their progress toward those goals. The goals people choose to set are influenced by expectations of success and self-efficacy beliefs. Self-efficacy, or judgments of one's capability, can either lower or raise one's expectations for success, and therefore cause people to set more easily or less easily attainable goals. An important element of Bandura's theory is the influence of models, or social comparison. People often observe others—others similar to themselves—in order to make predictions about their own performance. If they observe someone succeed at a task, the observer's self-efficacy may rise, and they may be more motivated to attempt the task themselves. If a person observes someone fail, they may believe they too are less likely to attain a similar outcome or goal.

A number of different factors can influence an individual's efficacy as she engages in a learning task. Not all experiences of failure and success are the same, for example. An individual who earns a low grade on one math exam, after have received fifteen perfect scores in a row, may experience little change in efficacy. Task difficulty also impacts how a student feels about her ability. If she succeeds in something that required little effort, her efficacy might not change; if she succeeds in something that requires great effort, however, she may develop more confidence in her abilities. Finally, the source of feedback a student receives influences performance. Self-efficacy is more likely to be enhanced if a teacher tells a student she is capable than if she receives the same feedback from a fellow student. Schunk (1996) suggests there are a number of ways teachers can design classroom activities to improve efficacy, by focusing on goal setting, performance feedback, rewards, and instructional presentation, to name just a few.

Terms & Concepts

Attributions: Attributions are the explanations people give for their behavior and the behavior of others. Attributions exist along three dimensions: internal and external, stable and unstable, and controllable and uncontrollable. The attributions people typically use in achievement settings are ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck.

Conditioning Theories: Behaviorists defined motivation in terms of the frequency and rate of observable behaviors. Conditioning theories of motivation - classical and operant conditioning, for example - explain motivation in terms of the relationship between stimuli and responses; motivation is not explained as a cognitive or mental event.

Drives: Early theories explained motivation largely in terms of physiological deficits. When an organism or human experienced a need such as hunger, drive serves as the motivational construct that prompts the organism to act in such a way to reduce the need - in this case, to find food.

Expectancy-Value Theories: Also known as achievement motivation, expectancy-value theories suggest that motivation is a result of how likely a person thinks she is to attain a particular outcome, and how highly she values it. More recent expectancy-value theories believe other cognitive variables - such as goals and perceptions of ability - also impact motivation.

Extrinsic Motivation: Extrinsic motivation is motivation to engage in an activity as a means to an end. Grades and money are examples of extrinsic motivators. By contrast, those who are intrinsically motivated find activities enjoyable as ends in themselves.

Flow: Flow is a theory of intrinsic motivation. Individuals who attain flow experience loss of self-consciousness, intense concentration, an increased sense of control, and a transformed sense of time. Activities that foster flow are typically ones that have clear goals and provide immediate feedback, and in which the challenge is met with an equal amount of skill. In order to maintain flow, individuals must seek increasingly higher levels of challenge.

Intrinsic Motivation: Intrinsic motivation is defined as motivation to engage in an activity for its own sake. It is often contrasted with extrinsic motivation, or motivation to engage in an activity as a means to an end - to earn a reward for example, or the recognition of others.

Learning Goals: Goal orientation theory suggests that the type of goal a student adopts impacts behavior and motivation. Those who choose mastery or learning goals tend to concentrate on learning strategies and processes that help them improve their skills. The focus is accomplishing something challenging, and learning according to self-standards of improvement. Students who adopt mastery or learning goals tend to achieve at higher levels than those who adopt performance or outcome goals.

Performance Goals: Goal orientation theory suggests that the type of goal a student adopts impacts behavior and motivation. Those who adopt performance goals focus on task completion, as opposed to the processes used to complete the task. Such students are more likely to be competitive, comparing their performance to others rather than to self-standards. Research has generally shown that students who adopt process or mastery goals achieve at higher levels than those adopt performance goals.

Self-Actualization: Maslow's humanistic theory of motivation established a hierarchy of needs, the highest level of which was self-actualization. Self-actualized people use their talents and capabilities to fulfill their potential; people can become self-actualized by pursuing a variety of activities, but very few people ever attain it.

Self-Efficacy: Self-efficacy is a judgment about one's ability. Self-efficacy varies according to activity, such that a person might have high self-efficacy in English, but low self-efficacy in mathematics. Its impacts the goals people set for themselves, as well as the amount of effort they put forth to obtain them.

Bibliography

Bauerle, S. Y., Amirkhan, J. H., & Hupka, R. B. (2002). An attribution theory analysis of romantic jealousy. Motivation and Emotion, 26, 297-319. Retrieved September 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Beck, R. C. (2000). Motivation: Theories and principles. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Borders, A., Earleywine, M., & Huey, S. (2004). Predicting problem behaviors with multiple expectancies: Expanding expectancy-value theory. Adolescence, 39 , 539-550. Retrieved September 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Bryan, R. R., Glynn, S. M., & Kittleson, J. M. (2011). Motivation, achievement, and advanced placement intent of high school students learning science. Science Education, 95, 1049-1065. Retrieved on December 4, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Clinkenbeard, P. R. (2012). Motivation and gifted students: Implications of theory and research. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 622-630. Retrieved on December 4, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper Perennial Publishing.

Espinoza, P., Quezada, S., Rincones, R., Strobach, E. E., & Gutiérrez, M. (2012). Attributional bias instrument (ABI): Validation of a measure to assess ability and effort explanations for math performance. Social Psychology of Education, 15, 533-554. Retrieved on December 4, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Froiland, J., Oros, E., Smith, L., & Hirchert, T. (2012). Intrinsic motivation to learn: The nexus between psychological health and academic success. Contemporary School Psychology, 16 91-100. Retrieved on December 4, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Gobel, P., & Setsuko, M. (2007). Success and failure in the EFL classroom: Exploring students' attributional beliefs in language learning. EUROSLA Yearbook, 7, 149-169. Retrieved September 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Hui-ju, L. (2015). Learner autonomy: The role of motivation in foreign language learning. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 6(6), 1165–1174. Retrieved January 8, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Li, W., Solmon, M.A., Lee, A.M., Purvis, G., & Chu, H. (2007). Examining the relationship between students' implicit theories of ability, goal orientations, and the preferred type of augmented feedback. Journal of Sport Behavior, 30, 280-291. Retrieved September 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Na Wei. (2016). An investigation of motivation in children's foreign language learning process--A case study on the basis of needs analysis. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(7), 1413-1419. Retrieved December 29, 2016 from EBSCO online database Education Source.

Pintrich, P.R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Schunk, D.H. (1996). Learning theories: An educational perspective. Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Speirs Neumeister, K. L., Fletcher, K. L., & Burney, V. H. (2015). Perfectionism and achievement motivation in high-ability students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38(3), 215–232. Retrieved January 8, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Suggested Reading

Barry, N.H. (2007). Motivating the reluctant student. American Music Teacher, 56, 23-27. Retrieved September 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Oyserman, Daphna. (2015). Pathways to success through identity-based motivation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Schunk, D.H., & Zimmerman, B.J. (Eds.). (1994). Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Stipek, D. J. (1993). Motivation to learn: From theory to practice. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Studer, B., & Knecht, S. Motivation: Theory, neurobiology, and applications. Amsterdam: Academic Press.

Wadsworth, L.M., Husman, J., Duggan, M.A., & Pennington, M.N. (2007). Online mathematics achievement: Effects of learning strategies and self-efficacy. Journal of Developmental Education, 30, 6-14. Retrieved September 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.