Open main menu

Search
EditWatch this pageRead in another language
Motivation
Page issues
This article is about the theoretical construct. For the bike-sharing system
management company, see Motivate (company).
Motivation is a theoretical construct used to explain behaviour. It gives the reason
for people's actions, desires, and needs. Motivation can also be defined as one's
direction to behavior, or what causes a person to want to repeat a behavior and vice
versa.[1] A motive is what prompts the person to act in a certain way, or at least
develop an inclination for specific behavior.[2] According to Maehr and Meyer,
"Motivation is a word that is part of the popular culture as few other psychological
concepts are."[3]

Types of theories and models Edit

Motivation theories can be classified on a number of bases:

Natural vs. Rational: based on whether the underlying theory of human cognition is
based on natural forces (drives, needs, desires) or some kind of rationality
(instrumentality, meaningfulness, self-identity).
Content vs. Process: based on whether the focus is on the content ("what")
motivates vs process ("how") motivation takes place.
Neuroscience Edit

Main article: Motivational salience

Motivation as a desire to perform an action is usually defined as having two parts,
directional such as directed towards a positive stimulus or away from a negative
one, as well as the activated "seeking phase" and consummatory "liking phase".
This type of motivation has neurobiological roots in the basal ganglia, and
mesolimbic dopaminergic pathways. Activated "seeking" behavior, such as
locomotor activity is influenced by dopaminergic drugs, and in micro dialysis reveals
dopamine release during anticipation of a reward.[4] The "wanting behavior"
associated with a rewarding stimulus can be increased by microinjections of
dopamine and dopaminergic drugs in the dorsorostral nucleus accumbens and
posterior ventral palladium. Opioid injections in this area produce pleasure, however
outside of these hedonic hotspots they create an increased desire.[5] Furthermore,
depletion or inhibition of DA in neurons of the nucleus accumbens decreases
appetitive but not consummatory behavior. Dopamine is further implicated in
motivation as administration of amphetamine increased the break point in a
progressive ratio self-reinforcement schedule. That is, subjects were willing to go to
greater lengths (e.g. press a level more times) to obtain a reward.[6]

Psychological theories Edit

Motivation can be conceived of as a cycle in which thoughts influence behaviors,

behaviors drive performance, performance affects thoughts, and the cycle begins
again. Each stage of the cycle is composed of many dimensions including attitudes,
beliefs, intentions, effort, and withdrawal which can all affect the motivation that an
individual experiences. Most psychological theories hold that motivation exists
purely within the individual, but socio-cultural theories express motivation as an
outcome of participation in actions and activities within the cultural context of social
groups.[7]

Rational motivations Edit

The idea that human beings are rational and human behavior is guided by reason is
an old one. However, recent research (on satisficing for example) has significantly
undermined the idea of homo economicus or of perfect rationality in favour of a
more bounded rationality. The field of behavioural economics is particularly
concerned with the limits of rationality in economic agents.[8]

Incentive theories: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation Edit

Motivation can be divided into two different theories known as intrinsic (internal or
inherent) motivation and extrinsic (external) motivation.

Intrinsic motivation Edit

See also: Flow (psychology) and Ikigai
Intrinsic motivation has been studied since the early 1970s. Intrinsic motivation is
the self-desire to seek out new things and new challenges, to analyze one's
capacity, to observe and to gain knowledge.[9] It is driven by an interest or
enjoyment in the task itself, and exists within the individual rather than relying on
external pressures or a desire for consideration. The phenomenon of intrinsic
motivation was first acknowledged within experimental studies of animal behavior.
In these studies, it was evident that the organisms would engage in playful and
curiosity driven behaviors in the absence of reward. Intrinsic motivation is a natural
motivational tendency and is a critical element in cognitive, social, and physical
development.[10] Students who are intrinsically motivated are more likely to
engage in the task willingly as well as work to improve their skills, which will
increase their capabilities.[11] Students are likely to be intrinsically motivated if
they:

attribute their educational results to factors under their own control, also known as
autonomy or locus of control
believe they have the skills to be effective agents in reaching their desired goals,
also known as self-efficacy beliefs
are interested in mastering a topic, not just in achieving good grades
An example of intrinsic motivation is when an employee becomes an IT professional
because he or she wants to learn about how computer users interact with computer
networks. The employee has the intrinsic motivation to gain more knowledge.[12]
Art for art's sake is an example of intrinsic motivation in the domain of art.

Traditionally, researchers thought of motivations to use computer systems to be

primarily driven by extrinsic purposes; however, many modern systems have their
use driven primarily by intrinsic motivations.[13] Examples of such systems used
primarily to fulfil users' intrinsic motivations, include on-line gaming, virtual worlds,
online shopping, learning/education, online dating, digital music repositories, social
networking, online pornography, gamified systems, and general gamification. Even
traditional management information systems (e.g., ERP, CRM) are being 'gamified'
such that both extrinsic and intrinsic motivations must increasingly be considered.

Advantages: Intrinsic motivation can be long-lasting and self-sustaining. Efforts to

build this kind of motivation are also typically efforts at promoting student learning.
Such efforts often focus on the subject rather than rewards or punishments.

Disadvantages: Efforts at fostering intrinsic motivation can be slow to affect

behavior and can require special and lengthy preparation. Students are individuals,
so a variety of approaches may be needed to motivate different students. It is often
helpful to know what interests one's students in order to connect these interests
with the subject matter. This requires getting to know one's students. Also, it helps if
the instructor is interested in the subject.[14]

Extrinsic motivation Edit

See also: Goal orientation
Extrinsic motivation refers to the performance of an activity in order to attain a
desired outcome and it is the opposite of intrinsic motivation.[9] Extrinsic
motivation comes from influences outside of the individual. In extrinsic motivation,
the harder question to answer is where do people get the motivation to carry out
and continue to push with persistence. Usually extrinsic motivation is used to attain
outcomes that a person wouldn't get from intrinsic motivation.[15] Common
extrinsic motivations are rewards (for example money or grades) for showing the
desired behavior, and the threat of punishment following misbehavior. Competition
is an extrinsic motivator because it encourages the performer to win and to beat
others, not simply to enjoy the intrinsic rewards of the activity. A cheering crowd
and the desire to win a trophy are also extrinsic incentives.[16]

Social psychological research has indicated that extrinsic rewards can lead to
overjustification and a subsequent reduction in intrinsic motivation. In one study
demonstrating this effect, children who expected to be (and were) rewarded with a
ribbon and a gold star for drawing pictures spent less time playing with the drawing
materials in subsequent observations than children who were assigned to an
unexpected reward condition.[17] However, another study showed that third
graders who were rewarded with a book showed more reading behavior in the
future, implying that some rewards do not undermine intrinsic motivation.[18] While
the provision of extrinsic rewards might reduce the desirability of an activity, the
use of extrinsic constraints, such as the threat of punishment, against performing an
activity has actually been found to increase one's intrinsic interest in that activity. In
one study, when children were given mild threats against playing with an attractive
toy, it was found that the threat actually served to increase the child's interest in
the toy, which was previously undesirable to the child in the absence of threat.[19]

Behaviorist theories Edit

While many theories on motivation have a mentalistic perspective, behaviorists
focus only on observable behavior and theories founded on experimental evidence.
In the view of behaviorism, motivation is understood as a question about what
factors cause, prevent, or withhold various behaviors, while the question of, for
instance, conscious motives would be ignored. Where others would speculate about
such things as values, drives, or needs, that may not be observed directly,
behaviorists are interested in the observable variables that affect the type,
intensity, frequency and duration of observable behavior. Through the basic
research of such scientists as Pavlov, Watson and Skinner, several basic
mechanisms that govern behavior have been identified. The most important of
these are classical conditioning and operant conditioning.

Classical and operant conditioning Edit

Main article: Motivational salience
In classical (or respondent) conditioning, behavior is understood as responses
triggered by certain environmental or physical stimuli. They can be unconditioned,
such as in-born reflexes, or learned through the pairing of an unconditioned stimulus
with a different stimulus, which then becomes a conditioned stimulus. In relation to
motivation, classical conditioning might be seen as one explanation as to why an
individual performs certain responses and behaviors in certain situations.[20][21]
For instance, a dentist might wonder why a patient does not seem motivated to
show up for an appointment, with the explanation being that the patient has
associated the dentist (conditioned stimulus) with the pain (unconditioned stimulus)
that elicits a fear response (conditioned response), leading to the patient being
reluctant to visit the dentist.

In operant conditioning, the type and frequency of behavior is determined mainly by

its consequences. If a certain behavior, in the presence of a certain stimulus, is
followed by a desirable consequence (a reinforcer), the emitted behavior will
increase in frequency in the future, in the presence of the stimulus that preceded
the behavior (or a similar one). Conversely, if the behavior is followed by something
undesirable (a punisher), the behavior is less likely to occur in the presence of the
stimulus. In a similar manner, removal of a stimulus directly following the behavior
might either increase or decrease the frequency of that behavior in the future
(negative reinforcement or punishment).[20][21] For instance, a student that gained
praise and a good grade after turning in a paper, might seem more motivated in
writing papers in the future (positive reinforcement); if the same student put in a lot
of work on a task without getting any praise for it, he or she might seem less
motivated to do school work in the future (negative punishment). If a student starts
to cause trouble in class gets punished with something he or she dislikes, such as
detention (positive punishment), that behavior would decrease in the future. The
student might seem more motivated to behave in class, presumably in order to
avoid further detention (negative reinforcement).

The strength of reinforcement or punishment is dependent on schedule and timing.

A reinforcer or punisher affects the future frequency of a behavior most strongly if it
occurs within seconds of the behavior. A behavior that is reinforced intermittently,
at unpredictable intervals, will be more robust and persistent, compared to one that
is reinforced every time the behavior is performed.[20][21] For example, if the
misbehaving student in the above example was punished a week after the
troublesome behavior, that might not affect future behavior.

In addition to these basic principles, antecedent factors also affect behavior.

Behavior is punished or reinforced in the context of whatever stimuli were present
just before the behavior was performed, which means that a particular behavior
might not be affected in every context, just because it was punished or reinforced in
a particular one.[20][21] A lack of praise for school-related behavior might, for
instance, not decrease sports-related behavior usually reinforced by praise.

The various mechanisms of operant conditioning may be used to understand the

motivation for various behaviors by examining what happens just after the behavior
(the consequence), in what context the behavior is performed or not performed (the
antecedent), and under what circumstances (motivating operators).[20][21]

Incentive motivation Edit

Main section: Motivational salience Incentive salience
Incentive theory is a specific theory of motivation, derived partly from behaviorist
principles of reinforcement, which concerns an incentive or motive to do something.
The most common incentive would be a reward. Rewards can be tangible or
intangible, and is presented generally after the occurrence of the action or behavior
that one is trying to correct or cause to happen again. This is done by associating
positive meaning to the behavior and or action. Studies show that if the person
receives the reward immediately, the effect is greater, and decreases as delay
lengthens.[22] Repetitive action-reward combination can cause the action to
become a habit.[22]

"Reinforcers and reinforcement principles of behavior differ from the hypothetical

construct of reward." A reinforcer is anything that follows an action, with the
intentions that the action will now occur more frequently. From this perspective, the
concept of distinguishing between intrinsic and extrinsic forces is irrelevant.

Incentive theory in psychology treats motivation and behavior of the individual as

they are influenced by beliefs, such as engaging in activities that are expected to be
profitable. Incentive theory is promoted by behavioral psychologists, such as B.F.
Skinner. Incentive theory is especially supported by Skinner in his philosophy of
Radical behaviorism, meaning that a person's actions always have social
ramifications: and if actions are positively received people are more likely to act in
this manner, or if negatively received people are less likely to act in this manner.

Incentive theory distinguishes itself from other motivation theories, such as drive
theory, in the direction of the motivation. In incentive theory, stimuli "attract" a
person towards them, and push them towards the stimulus. In terms of behaviorism,
incentive theory involves positive reinforcement: the reinforcing stimulus has been
conditioned to make the person happier. As opposed to in drive theory, which
involves negative reinforcement: a stimulus has been associated with the removal
of the punishmentthe lack of homeostasis in the body. For example, a person has
come to know that if they eat when hungry, it will eliminate that negative feeling of
hunger, or if they drink when thirsty, it will eliminate that negative feeling of thirst.
[22]

Motivating operations Edit

Motivating operations, MOs, relate to the field of motivation in that they help
improve understanding aspects of behavior that are not covered by operant
conditioning. In operant conditioning, the function of the reinforcer is to influence
future behavior. The presence of a stimulus believed to function as a reinforcer does
not according to this terminology explain the current behavior of an organism only
previous instances of reinforcement of that behavior (in the same or similar
situations) do. Through the behavior-altering effect of MOs, it is possible to affect
current behavior of an individual, giving another piece of the puzzle of motivation.

Motivating operations are factors that affect learned behavior in a certain context.
MOs have two effects: a value-altering effect, which increases or decreases the
efficiency of a reinforcer, and a behavior-altering effect, which modifies learned
behavior that has previously been punished or reinforced by a particular stimulus.
[20]

When a motivating operation causes an increase in the effectiveness of a reinforcer,

or amplifies a learned behavior in some way (such as increasing frequency,
intensity, duration or speed of the behavior), it functions as an establishing
operation, EO. A common example of this would be food deprivation, which
functions as an EO in relation to food: the food-deprived organism will perform
behaviors previously related to the acquisition of food more intensely, frequently,
longer, or faster in the presence of food, and those behaviors would be especially
strongly reinforced.[20] For instance, a fast-food worker earning minimal wage,
forced to work more than one job to make ends meet, would be highly motivated by
a pay raise, because of the current deprivation of money (a conditioned establishing
operation). The worker would work hard to try to achieve the raise, and getting the
raise would function as an especially strong reinforcer of work behavior.

Conversely, a motivating operation that causes a decrease in the effectiveness of a

reinforcer, or diminishes a learned behavior related to the reinforcer, functions as an
abolishing operation, AO. Again using the example of food, satiation of food prior to
the presentation of a food stimulus would produce a decrease on food-related
behaviors, and diminish or completely abolish the reinforcing effect of acquiring and
ingesting the food.[20] Consider the board of a large investment bank, concerned
with a too small profit margin, deciding to give the CEO a new incentive package in
order to motivate him to increase firm profits. If the CEO already has a lot of money,
the incentive package might not be a very good way to motivate him, because he
would be satiated on money. Getting even more money wouldn't be a strong
reinforcer for profit-increasing behavior, and wouldn't elicit increased intensity,
frequency or duration of profit-increasing behavior.

Motivation and psychotherapy Edit

See also: Motivational interviewing
Motivation lies at the core of many behaviorist approaches to psychological
treatment. A person with autism-spectrum disorder is seen as lacking motivation to
perform socially relevant behaviors social stimuli are not as reinforcing for people
with autism compared to other people. Depression is understood as a lack of
reinforcement (especially positive reinforcement) leading to extinction of behavior
in the depressed individual. A patient with specific phobia is not motivated to seek
out the phobic stimulus because it acts as a punisher, and is over-motivated to
avoid it (negative reinforcement). In accordance, therapies have been designed to
address these problems, such as EIBI and CBT for major depression and specific
phobia.

Socio-cultural theory Edit

Sociocultural theory (see Cultural-historical psychology) (also known as Social
Motivation) emphasizes impact of activity and actions mediated through social
interaction, and within social contexts. Sociocultural theory represents a shift from
traditional theories of motivation, which view the individuals innate drives or
mechanistic operand learning as primary determinants of motivation. Critical
elements to socio-cultural theory applied to motivation include, but are not limited
to, the role of social interactions and the contributions from culturally-based
knowledge and practice.[7] Sociocultural theory extends the social aspects of
Cognitive Evaluation Theory, which espouses the important role of positive feedback
from others during action,[9] but requires the individual as the internal locus of
causality. Sociocultural theory predicts that motivation has an external locus of
causality, and is socially distributed among the social group.[7]

An example of socio cultural theory would be social settings where people work
together to solve collective problems, such as athletic teams, study groups, work
groups, and civic organization.[23] Although individuals will have internalized goals,
they will also develop internalized goals of others, as well as new interests and
goals collectively with those that they feel socially connected to.[23]

Social motivation is tied to one's activity in a group. It cannot form from a single
mind alone. For example, bowling alone is naught but the dull act of throwing a ball
into pins, and so people are much less likely to smile during the activity alone, even
upon getting a strike because their satisfaction or dissatisfaction does not need to
be communicated, and so it is internalized. However, when with a group, people are
more inclined to smile regardless of their results because it acts as a positive
communication that is beneficial for pleasurable interaction and teamwork.[23]
Thus the act of bowling becomes a social activity as opposed to a dull action
because it becomes an exercise in interaction, competition, team building, and
sportsmanship. It is because of this phenomenon that studies have shown that
people are more intrigued in performing mundane activities so long as there is
company because it provides the opportunity to interact in one way or another, be it
for bonding, amusement, collaboration, or alternative perspectives.[23] Examples of
activities that may one may not be motivated to do alone but could be done with
others for social benefit are things such as throwing and catching a baseball with a
friend, making funny faces with children, building a treehouse, and performing a
debate.

Push and pull Edit

Push motivations are those where people push themselves towards their goals or to
achieve something, such as the desire for escape, rest and relaxation, prestige,
health and fitness, adventure, and social interaction.[24]

However, with push motivation it's also easy to get discouraged when there are
obstacles present in the path of achievement. Push motivation acts as a willpower
and people's willpower is only as strong as the desire behind the willpower.[25]

Additionally, a study has been conducted on social networking and its push and pull
effects. One thing that is mentioned is "Regret and dissatisfaction correspond to
push factors because regret and dissatisfaction are the negative factors that compel
users to leave their current service provider."[26] So from reading this, we now
know that Push motivations can also be a negative force. In this case, that negative
force is regret and dissatisfaction.

Pull motivation is the opposite of push. It is a type of motivation that is much

stronger. "Some of the factors are those that emerge as a result of the
attractiveness of a destination as it is perceived by those with the propensity to
travel. They include both tangible resources, such as beaches, recreation facilities,
and cultural attractions, and traveler's perceptions and expectation, such as
novelty, benefit expectation, and marketing image."[24] Pull motivation can be seen
as the desire to achieve a goal so badly that it seems that the goal is pulling us
toward it. That is why pull motivation is stronger than push motivation. It is easier to
be drawn to something rather than to push yourself for something you desire. It can
also be an alternative force when compared to negative force. From the same study
as previously mentioned, "Regret and dissatisfaction with an existing SNS service
provider may trigger a heightened interest toward switching service providers, but
such a motive will likely translate into reality in the presence of a good alternative.
Therefore, alternative attractiveness can moderate the effects of regret and
dissatisfaction with switching intention"[26] And so, pull motivation can be an
attracting desire when negative influences come into the picture.

Self-control Edit
Main article: Self-control
The self-control aspect of motivation is increasingly considered to be a subset of
emotional intelligence;[27] it is suggested that although a person may be classed as
highly intelligent (as measured by many traditional intelligence tests), they may
remain unmotivated to pursue intellectual endeavours. Vroom's "expectancy
theory" provides an account of when people may decide to exert self-control in
pursuit of a particular goal.

DrivesEdit
Main article: Drive theory
A drive or desire can be described as a deficiency or need that activates behavior
that is aimed at a goal or an incentive.[28] These drives are thought to originate
within the individual and may not require external stimuli to encourage the
behavior. Basic drives could be sparked by deficiencies such as hunger, which
motivates a person to seek food whereas more subtle drives might be the desire for
praise and approval, which motivates a person to behave in a manner pleasing to
others.

Another basic drive is the sexual drive which like food motivates us because it is
essential to our survival.[29] The desire for sex is wired deep into the brain of all
human beings as glands secrete hormones that travel through the blood to the
brain and stimulates the onset of sexual desire.[29] The hormone involved in the
initial onset of sexual desire is called Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA).[29] The
hormonal basis of both men and women's sex drives is testosterone.[29] Men
naturally have more testosterone than women do and so are more likely than
woman to think about sex.[29]

Drive-reduction theory Edit

Clark Hull was the behaviorist who developed the drive-reduction theory of
motivation.
Drive theory grows out of the concept that people have certain biological drives,
such as hunger and thirst. As time passes the strength of the drive increases if it is
not satisfied (in this case by eating). Upon satisfying a drive the drive's strength is
reduced. Created by Clark Hull and further developed by Kenneth Spence, the
theory became well known in the 1940s and 1950s. Many of the motivational
theories that arose during the 1950s and 1960s were either based on Hull's original
theory or were focused on providing alternatives to the drive-reduction theory,
including Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs, which emerged as an alternative to
Hull's approach.[30]

Drive theory has some intuitive or folk validity. For instance when preparing food,
the drive model appears to be compatible with sensations of rising hunger as the
food is prepared, and, after the food has been consumed, a decrease in subjective
hunger.[31] There are several problems, however, that leave the validity of drive
reduction open for debate.

Cognitive dissonance theory Edit

Main article: Cognitive dissonance
Suggested by Leon Festinger, cognitive dissonance occurs when an individual
experiences some degree of discomfort resulting from an inconsistency between
two cognitions: their views on the world around them, and their own personal
feelings and actions.[22] For example, a consumer may seek to reassure
themselves regarding a purchase, feeling that another decision may have been
preferable. Their feeling that another purchase would have been preferable is
inconsistent with their action of purchasing the item. The difference between their
feelings and beliefs causes dissonance, so they seek to reassure themselves.

While not a theory of motivation, per se, the theory of cognitive dissonance
proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. The cognitive
miser perspective makes people want to justify things in a simple way in order to
reduce the effort they put into cognition. They do this by changing their attitudes,
beliefs, or actions, rather than facing the inconsistencies, because dissonance is a
mental strain. Dissonance is also reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. It is
one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.

Content theories Edit

The content theory was one of the earliest theories of motivation. Content theories
can also be referred to needs theories, because the theory focuses on the
importance of what motivates us (needs). In other words, they try to identify what
our "needs" are and how they relate to motivation to fulfill those needs. Another
definition could be defined by Pritchard and Ashwood, is the process used to
allocate energy to maximize the satisfaction of needs.[32]

Maslow's hierarchy of needs Edit

Maslow's Pyramid

Content theory of human motivation includes both Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of

needs and Herzberg's two-factor theory. Maslow's theory is one of the most widely
discussed theories of motivation. Abraham Maslow believed that man is inherently
good and argued that individuals possess a constantly growing inner drive that has
great potential. The needs hierarchy system, devised by Maslow (1954), is a
commonly used scheme for classifying human motives.[33]

The American motivation psychologist Abraham H. Maslow developed the hierarchy

of needs consisting of five hierarchic classes. According to Maslow, people are
motivated by unsatisfied needs. The needs, listed from basic (lowest-earliest) to
most complex (highest-latest) are as follows:[34]

Physiology (hunger, thirst, sleep, etc.)

Safety/Security/Shelter/Health
Social/Love/Friendship
Self-esteem/Recognition/Achievement
Self actualization/achievement of full potential/can never be fully accomplished
The basic requirements build upon the first step in the pyramid: physiology. If there
are deficits on this level, all behavior will be oriented to satisfy this deficit.
Essentially, if you have not slept or eaten adequately, you won't be interested in
your self-esteem desires. Subsequently, we have the second level, which awakens a
need for security. After securing those two levels, the motives shift to the social
sphere, the third level. Psychological requirements comprise the fourth level, while
the top of the hierarchy consists of self-realization and self-actualization.

Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory can be summarized as follows:

Human beings have wants and desires which influence their behavior. Only
unsatisfied needs influence behavior, satisfied needs do not.
Needs are arranged in order of importance to human life, from the basic to the
complex.
The person advances to the next level of needs only after the lower level need is at
least minimally satisfied.
The further the progress up the hierarchy, the more individuality, humanness and
psychological health a person will show.
Herzberg's two-factor theory Edit
Main article: Two-factor theory

Frederick Herzberg's two-factor theory concludes that certain factors in the

workplace result in job satisfaction, but if absent, they don't lead to dissatisfaction
but no satisfaction. The factors that motivate people can change over their lifetime,
but "respect for me as a person" is one of the top motivating factors at any stage of
life.

He distinguished between:

Motivators (e.g. challenging work, recognition, responsibility) which give positive

satisfaction, and
Hygiene factors (e.g. status, job security, salary and fringe benefits) that do not
motivate if present, but, if absent, result in demotivation.
Herzberg concluded that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction were the products of
two separate factors: motivating factors (satisfiers) and hygiene factors
(dissatisfiers).

Some motivating factors (satisfiers) were: Achievement, recognition, work itself,

responsibility, advancement, and growth.

Some hygiene factors (dissatisfiers) were: company policy, supervision, working

conditions, interpersonal relations, salary, status, job security, and personal life.[2]

The name hygiene factors is used because, like hygiene, the presence will not
improve health, but absence can cause health deterioration.
Herzberg's theory has found application in such occupational fields as information
systems and in studies of user satisfaction such as computer user satisfaction.

Alderfer's ERG theory Edit

Main article: ERG theory
Alderfer, expanding on Maslow's hierarchy of needs, created the ERG theory. This
theory posits that there are three groups of core needs existence, relatedness,
and growth, hence the label: ERG theory. The existence group is concerned with
providing our basic material existence requirements. They include the items that
Maslow considered to be physiological and safety needs. The second group of needs
are those of relatedness- the desire we have for maintaining important personal
relationships. These social and status desires require interaction with others if they
are to be satisfied, and they align with Maslow's social need and the external
component of Maslow's esteem classification. Finally, Alderfer isolates growth needs
as an intrinsic desire for personal development. Maslow's categories are broken
down into many different parts and there are a lot of needs. The ERG categories are
more broad and covers more than just certain areas. As a person grows, the
existence, relatedness, and growth for all desires continue to grow. All these needs
should be fulfilled to greater wholeness as a human being.[35] These include the
intrinsic component from Maslow's esteem category and the characteristics
included under self-actualization.

Self-determination theory Edit

Main article: Self-determination theory
Since the early 1970s Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan[36] have conducted
research that eventually led to the proposition of the self-determination theory
(SDT). This theory focuses on the degree to which an individual's behaviour is self-
motivated and self-determined. SDT identifies three innate needs that, if satisfied,
allow optimal function and growth: competence,[37][38] relatedness,[39] and
autonomy.[40][41]

These three psychological needs motivate the self to initiate specific behaviour and
mental nutriments that are essential for psychological health and well-being. When
these needs are satisfied, there are positive consequences, such as well-being and
growth, leading people to be motivated, productive and happy. When they are
thwarted, people's motivation, productivity and happiness plummet.[42]

There are three essential elements to the theory:[43]

Humans are inherently proactive with their potential and mastering their inner
forces (such as drive and emotions).
Humans have an inherent tendency towards growth, development and integrated
functioning.
Optimal development and actions are inherent in humans but they do not happen
automatically.
Temporal motivation theory Edit
Main article: Temporal motivation theory
A recent approach in developing a broad, integrative theory of motivation is
temporal motivation theory.[44] Introduced in a 2006 Academy of Management
Review article,[45] it synthesizes into a single formulation the primary aspects of
several other major motivational theories, including Incentive Theory, Drive Theory,
Need Theory, Self-Efficacy and Goal Setting. It simplifies the field of motivation and
allows findings from one theory to be translated into terms of another. Another
journal article that helped to develop the Temporal Motivation Theory, "The Nature
of Procrastination,[46] " received American Psychological Association's George A.
Miller award for outstanding contribution to general science.

M o t i v a t i o n = Expectancy Value 1 + Impulsiveness Delay {\displaystyle

\mathrm {Motivation} ={\frac {\mbox{Expectancy Value}}{\mbox{1 +
Impulsiveness Delay}}}}
where M o t i v a t i o n {\displaystyle Motivation} , the desire for a particular
outcome, E x p e c t a n c y {\displaystyle Expectancy} or self-efficacy is the
probability of success, V a l u e {\displaystyle Value} is the reward associated with
the outcome, I m p u l s i v e n e s s {\displaystyle Impulsiveness} is the
individual's sensitivity to delay and D e l a y {\displaystyle Delay} is the time to
realization.[46]

Achievement motivation Edit

Achievement motivation is an integrative perspective based on the premise that
performance motivation results from the way broad components of personality are
directed towards performance. As a result, it includes a range of dimensions that
are relevant to success at work but which are not conventionally regarded as being
part of performance motivation. The emphasis on performance seeks to integrate
formerly separate approaches as need for achievement[47] with, for example, social
motives like dominance. Personality is intimately tied to performance and
achievement motivation, including such characteristics as tolerance for risk, fear of
failure, and others.[48][49][50]
Achievement motivation can be measured by The Achievement Motivation
Inventory, which is based on this theory and assesses three factors (in 17 separated
scales) relevant to vocational and professional success. This motivation has
repeatedly been linked with adaptive motivational patterns, including working hard,
a willingness to pick learning tasks with much difficulty, and contributing success to
effort.[51]

Achievement motivation was studied intensively by David C. McClelland, John W.

Atkinson and their colleagues since the early 1950s.[52] This type of motivation is a
drive that is developed from an emotional state. One may feel the drive to achieve
by striving for success and avoiding failure. In achievement motivation, one would
hope that they excel in what they do and not think much about the failures or the
negatives.[53] Their research showed that business managers who were successful
demonstrated a high need to achieve no matter the culture. There are three major
characteristics of people who have a great need to achieve according to
McClelland's research.

They would prefer a work environment in which they are able to assume
responsibility for solving problems.
They would take calculated risk and establish moderate, attainable goals.
They want to hear continuous recognition, as well as feedback, in order for them to
know how well they are doing.[54]
Cognitive theories Edit
Cognitive theories define motivation in terms of how people think about situations.
Cognitive theories of motivation include goal-setting theory and expectancy theory.

Goal-setting theory Edit

Main article: Goal-setting theory
Goal-setting theory is based on the notion that individuals sometimes have a drive
to reach a clearly defined end state. Often, this end state is a reward in itself. A
goal's efficiency is affected by three features: proximity, difficulty and specificity.
One common goal setting methodology incorporates the SMART criteria, in which
goals are: specific, measurable, attainable/achievable, relevant, and time-bound. An
ideal goal should present a situation where the time between the initiation of
behavior and the end state is close. This explains why some children are more
motivated to learn how to ride a bike than to master algebra. A goal should be
moderate, not too hard or too easy to complete. In both cases, most people are not
optimally motivated, as many want a challenge (which assumes some kind of
insecurity of success). At the same time people want to feel that there is a
substantial probability that they will succeed. Specificity concerns the description of
the goal in their class. The goal should be objectively defined and intelligible for the
individual. A classic example of a poorly specified goal is to get the highest possible
grade. Most children have no idea how much effort they need to reach that goal.

Expectancy theory Edit

Main article: Expectancy theory
Expectancy theory was proposed by Victor H. Vroom in 1964. Expectancy theory
explains the behavior process in which an individual selects a behavior option over
another, and why/how this decision is made in relation to their goal.

There's also an equation for this theory which goes as follows:

M = {\displaystyle {\text{M}}=} E I V {\displaystyle {\text{ E}}\,\times \,

{\text{I}}\,\times \,{\text{V}}} or
Motivation = {\displaystyle {\text{Motivation}}=} Expectancy Instrumentality
Valence {\displaystyle {\text{ Expectancy}}\,\times \,
{\text{Instrumentality}}\,\times \,{\text{Valence}}} [55]
M (Motivation) is the amount an individual will be motivated by the condition or
environment they placed themselves in. Which is based from the following hence
the equation.
E (Expectancy) is the person's perception that effort will result in performance. In
other words, it's the person assessment of how well and what kind of effort will
relate in better performance.
I (Instrumentality) is the person's perception that performance will be rewarded or
punished.
V (Valence) is the perceived amount of the reward or punishment that will result
from the performance."[55]
Models of behavior change Edit
Social-cognitive models of behavior change include the constructs of motivation and
volition. Motivation is seen as a process that leads to the forming of behavioral
intentions. Volition is seen as a process that leads from intention to actual behavior.
In other words, motivation and volition refer to goal setting and goal pursuit,
respectively. Both processes require self-regulatory efforts. Several self-regulatory
constructs are needed to operate in orchestration to attain goals. An example of
such a motivational and volitional construct is perceived self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is
supposed to facilitate the forming of behavioral intentions, the development of
action plans, and the initiation of action. It can support the translation of intentions
into action.
John W. Atkinson, David Birch and their colleagues developed the theory of
"Dynamics of Action" to mathematically model change in behavior as a
consequence of the interaction of motivation and associated tendencies toward
specific actions.[56][57] The theory posits that change in behavior occurs when the
tendency for a new, unexpressed behavior becomes dominant over the tendency
currently motivating action. In the theory, the strength of tendencies rises and falls
as a consequence of internal and external stimuli (sources of instigation), inhibitory
factors, and consummatory in factors such as performing an action. In this theory,
there are three causes responsible for behavior and change in behavior:

Instigation (Ts) increases tendency when an activity has intrinsic ability to satisfy;
Inhibition (Taf) decreases tendency when there are obstacles to performing an
activity; and
Consummation decreases a tendency as it is performed.[58][59]
Thematic apperception test Edit
Main article: Thematic apperception test
Psychologists David C. McClelland and John W. Atkinson argued that motivation
should be unconscious. They refined measures of motivation by means of content
analysis of imaginative thought using, for example, the Thematic Apperception
Test.'[60][61]

Intrinsic motivation and the 16 basic desires theory Edit

Starting from studies involving more than 6,000 people, Professor Steven Reiss has
proposed a theory that found 16 basic desires that guide nearly all human behavior.
[62][63] Intrinsic motivation is the tendency to find challenges, to push to find out
for more, explore, and learn as much as possible. It is about reaching the most
possible potential as a human being.[15] The 16 basic desires that motivate our
actions and define our personalities are:

Acceptance, the need for approval

Curiosity, the need to learn
Eating, the need for food
Family, the need to raise children
Honor, the need to be loyal to the traditional values of one's clan/ethnic group
Idealism, the need for social justice
Independence, the need for individuality
Order, the need for organized, stable, predictable environments
Physical activity, the need for exercise
Power, the need for influence of will
Romance, the need for sex and for beauty
Saving, the need to collect
Social contact, the need for friends (peer relationships)
Social status, the need for social standing/importance
Tranquility, the need to be safe
Vengeance, the need to strike back and to compete
Attribution theory Edit
Main article: Attribution (psychology)
Attribution theory is a theory developed by psychologist, Fritz Heider that describes
the processes by which individuals explain the causes of their behavior and events.
[64] A form of attribution theory developed by psychologist, Bernard Weiner
describes an individual's beliefs about how the causes of success or failure affect
their emotions and motivations. Bernard Weiner's theory can be defined into two
perspectives: intrapersonal or interpersonal. The intrapersonal perspective includes
self-directed thoughts and emotions that are attributed to the self. The interpersonal
perspective includes beliefs about the responsibility of others and other directed
affects of emotions; the individual would place the blame on another individual.[65]

Individuals formulate explanatory attributions to understand the events they

experience and to seek reasons for their failures. When individuals seek positive
feedback from their failures, they use the feedback as motivation to show improved
performances. For example, using the intrapersonal perspective, a student who
failed a test may attribute their failure for not studying enough and would use their
emotion of shame or embarrassment as motivation to study harder for the next
test. A student who blames their test failure on the teacher would be using the
interpersonal perspective, and would use their feeling of disappointment as
motivation to rely on a different study source other than the teacher for the next
test.

Approach versus avoidance Edit

Main article: Motivational salience
Approach motivation can be defined as when a certain behavior or reaction to a
situation/environment is rewarded or results in a positive/desirable outcome. In
contrast, avoidance motivation can be defined as when a certain behavior or
reaction to a situation/environment is punished or results in a negative/undesirable
outcome.[60][66] Research suggests that, all else being equal, avoidance
motivations tend to be more powerful than approach motivations. Because people
expect losses to have more powerful emotional consequences than equal-size gains,
they will take more risks to avoid a loss than to achieve a gain.[60]

Practical applications

See also

References

Further reading

External links

Last edited 1 day ago by RA0808

RELATED ARTICLES
Self-determination theory
Work motivation
Employee motivation

Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted.

Terms of UsePrivacyDesktop