Citation: Huitt, W. (2001). Motivation to learn: An overview. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved [date], from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/motivation/motivate.html
Return to: | EdPsyc Interactive: Courses | Home Page |
The following definitions of motivation were gleaned from a variety of psychology textbooks and reflect the general consensus that motivation is an internal state or condition (sometimes described as a need, desire, or want) that serves to activate or energize behavior and give it direction (see Kleinginna and Kleinginna, 1981a).
Franken (1994) provides an additional component in his definition:
While still not widespread in terms of introductory psychology textbooks, many researchers are now beginning to acknowledge that the factors that energize behavior are likely different from the factors that provide for its persistence.
Importance of motivation
Most motivation theorists assume that motivation is involved in the performance of all learned responses; that is, a learned behavior will not occur unless it is energized. The major question among psychologists, in general, is whether motivation is a primary or secondary influence on behavior. That is, are changes in behavior better explained by principles of environmental/ecological influences, perception, memory, cognitive development, emotion, explanatory style, or personality or are concepts unique to motivation more pertinent.
For example, we know that people respond to increasingly complex or novel events (or stimuli) in the environment up to a point and then responses decrease. This inverted-U-shaped curve of behavior is well-known and widely acknowledged (e.g., Yerkes & Dodson, 1908). However, the major issue is one of explaining this phenomenon. Is this a conditioning (is the individual behaving because of past classical or operant conditioning), a motivational process (from an internal state of arousal), or is there some better explanation?
The relationship of motivation and emotion
Emotion (an indefinite subjective sensation experienced as a state of arousal) is different from motivation in that there is not necessarily a goal orientation affiliated with it. Emotions occur as a result of an interaction between perception of environmental stimuli, neural/hormonal responses to these perceptions (often labeled feelings), and subjective cognitive labeling of these feelings (Kleinginna and Kleinginna, 1981b). Evidence suggests there is a small core of core emotions (perhaps 6 or 8) that are uniquely associated with a specific facial expression (Izard, 1990). This implies that there are a small number of unique biological responses that are genetically hard-wired to specific facial expressions. A further implication is that the process works in reverse: if you want to change your feelings (i.e., your physiological functioning), you can do so by changing your facial expression. That is, if you are motivated to change how you feel and your feeling is associated with a specific facial expression, you can change that feeling by purposively changing your facial expression. Since most of us would rather feel happy than otherwise, the most appropriate facial expression would be a smile.
Explanations of influences/causes of arousal and direction may be different from explanations of persistence
In general, explanations regarding the source(s) of motivation can be categorized as either extrinsic (outside the person) or intrinsic (internal to the person). Intrinsic sources and corresponding theories can be further subcategorized as either body/physical, mind/mental (i.e., cognitive, affective, conative) or transpersonal/spiritual.
In current literature, needs are now viewed as dispositions toward action (i.e., they create a condition that is predisposed towards taking action or making a change and moving in a certain direction). Action or overt behavior may be initiated by either positive or negative incentives or a combination of both. The following chart provides a brief overview of the different sources of motivation (internal state) that have been studied. While initiation of action can be traced to each of these domains, it appears likely that initiation of behavior may be more related to emotions and/or the affective area (optimism vs. pessimism; self- esteem; etc.) while persistence may be more related to conation (volition) or goal-orientation.
|Sources of Motivational Needs|
Theories of motivation
Many of the theories of motivation address issues introduced previously in these materials. The following provides a brief overview to any terms or concepts that have not been previously discussed.
Each of the major theoretical approaches in behavioral learning theory posits a primary factor in motivation. Classical conditioning states that biological responses to associated stimuli energize and direct behavior. Operant learning states the primary factor is consequences: the application of reinforcers provides incentives to increase behavior; the application of punishers provides disincentives that result in a decrease in behavior.
There are several motivational theories that trace their roots to the information processing approach to learning. These approaches focus on the categories and labels people use help to identify thoughts, emotions, dispositions, and behaviors.
The first is cognitive dissonance theory which is in some respects similar to disequilibrium in Piaget's theory of cognitive development. This theory was developed by Leon Festinger (1957) and states that when there is a discrepancy between two beliefs, two actions, or between a belief and an action, we will act to resolve conflict and discrepancies. The implication is that if we can create the appropriate amount of disequilibrium, this will in turn lead to the individual changing his or her behavior which in turn will lead to a change in thought patterns which in turn leads to more change in behavior.
A second cognitive approach is attribution theory (Heider, 1958; Weiner, 1974). This theory proposes that every individual tries to explain success or failure of self and others by offering certain "attributions." These attributions are either internal or external and are either under control or not under control. The following chart shows the four attributions that result from a combination of internal or external locus of control and whether or not control is possible.
In a teaching/learning environment, it is important to assist the learner to develop a self-attribution explanation of effort (internal, control). If the person has an attribution of ability (internal, no control) as soon as the individual experiences some difficulties in the learning process, he or she will decrease appropriate learning behavior (e.g., I'm not good at this). If the person has an external attribution, then nothing the person can do will help that individual in a learning situation (i.e., responsibility for demonstrating what has been learned is completely outside the person). In this case, there is nothing to be done by the individual when learning problems occur.
A third cognitive approach is expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964) which proposes the following equation:
Motivation = Perceived Probability of Success (Expectancy)
Connection of Success and Reward (Instrumentality) *
Value of Obtaining Goal (Valance, Value)
Since this formula states that the three factors of Expectancy, Instrumentality, and Valance or Value are to be multiplied by each other, a low value in one will result in a low value of motivation. Therefore, all three must be present in order for motivation to occur. That is, if an individual doesn't believe he or she can be successful at a task OR the individual does not see a connection between his or her activity and success OR the individual does not value the results of success, then the probability is lowered that the individual will engage in the required learning activity. From the perspective of this theory, all three variables must be high in order for motivation and the resulting behavior to be high.
To summarize the cognitive approaches, cognitive dissonance theory suggests that we will seek balance or homeostasis in our lives and will resist influences or expectations to change. How, then, does change or growth occur. One source, according to Piaget, is biological development. As we mature cognitively we will rework our thinking and organizations of knowledge (e.g., schemas, paradigms, explanations) to more accurately reflect our understanding of the world. One of those organizations involves our explanations or attributions of success or failure. After puberty, when biological change slows down considerably, it is very difficult to change these attributions. It requires a long-term program where constant feedback is given about how one's behavior is responsible for one's success.
Notice the relationship between William James' formula for self-esteem (Self-esteem = Success / Pretensions) and the attribution and expectancy theories of motivation. If a person has an external attribution of success, self-concept is not likely to change as a result of success or failure because the person will attribute it to external factors. Likewise, if the person has an Internal/Ability explanation, his or her self-concept will be tied to learning to do a new activity quickly and easily (I do well because I'm naturally good at it). If failure or difficulty occurs, the person must quickly lower expectations in order to maintain self-esteem. However, if the person has a Internal/Effort explanation and high expectations for success, the person will persevere (i.e., stay motivated) in spite of temporary setbacks because one's self-esteem is not tied to immediate success.
The psychoanalytic theories of motivation propose a variety of fundamental influences. Freud (1990) suggested that all action or behavior is a result of internal, biological instincts that are classified into two categories: life (sexual) and death (aggression). Many of Freud's students broke with him over this concept. For example, Erikson (1993) and Sullivan (1968) proposed that interpersonal and social relationships are fundamental, Adler (1989) proposed power, while Jung (1953, 1997) proposed temperament and search for soul or personal meaningfulness.
One of the most influential writers in the area of motivation is Abraham Maslow (1954).
Abraham Maslow (1954) attempted to synthesize a large body of research related to human motivation. Prior to Maslow, researchers generally focused separately on such factors as biology, achievement, or power to explain what energizes, directs, and sustains human behavior. Maslow posited a hierarchy of human needs based on two groupings: deficiency needs and growth needs. Within the deficiency needs, each lower need must be met before moving to the next higher level. Once each of these needs has been satisfied, if at some future time a deficiency is detected, the individual will act to remove the deficiency. The first four levels are:
1) Physiological: hunger, thirst, bodily comforts, etc.;
2) Safety/security: out of danger;
3) Belonginess and Love: affiliate with others, be accepted; and
4) Esteem: to achieve, be competent, gain approval and recognition.
According to Maslow, an individual is ready to act upon the growth needs if and only if the deficiency needs are met. Maslow's initial conceptualization included only one growth need--self-actualization. Self-actualized people are characterized by: 1) being problem-focused; 2) incorporating an ongoing freshness of appreciation of life; 3) a concern about personal growth; and 4) the ability to have peak experiences. Maslow later differentiated the growth need of self-actualization, specifically naming two lower-level growth needs prior to general level of self-actualization (Maslow & Lowery, 1998) and one beyond that level (Maslow, 1971). They are:
5) Cognitive: to know, to understand, and explore;
6) Aesthetic: symmetry, order, and beauty;
7) Self-actualization: to find self-fulfillment and realize one's potential; and
8) Self-transcendence: to connect to something beyond the ego or to help others find self-fulfillment and realize their potential.
Maslow's basic position is that as one becomes more self-actualized and self-transcendent, one becomes more wise (develops wisdom) and automatically knows what to do in a wide variety of situations. Daniels (2001) suggests that Maslow's ultimate conclusion that the highest levels of self-actualization are transcendent in their nature may be one of his most important contributions to the study of human behavior and motivation.
Norwood (1999) proposes that Maslow's hierarchy can be used to describe the kinds of information that individual's seek at different levels. For example, individuals at the lowest level seek coping information in order to meet their basic needs. Information that is not directly connected to helping a person meet his or her needs in a very short time span is simply left unattended. Individuals at the safety level need helping information. They seek to be assisted in seeing how they can be safe and secure. Enlightening information is sought by individuals seeking to meet their belongingness needs. Quite often this can be found in books or other materials on relationship development. Empowering information is sought by people at the esteem level. They are looking for information on how their ego can be developed. Finally, people in the growth levels of cogntive, aesthetic, and self-actualization seek edifying information. While Norwood does not specifically address the level of transcendence, I believe it safe to say that individuals at this stage would seek information on how to connect to something beyond themselves or to how others could be edified.
Maslow published his first conceptualization of his theory over 50 years ago (Maslow, 1943) and it has since become one of the most popular and often cited theories of human motivation. An interesting phenomenon related to Maslow's work is that in spite of a lack of evidence to support his hierarchy, it enjoys wide acceptance (Wahba & Bridgewell, 1976; Soper, Milford & Rosenthal, 1995).
The few major studies that have been completed on the hierarchy seem to support the proposals of William James (1892/1962) and Mathes (1981) that there are three levels of human needs. James hypothesized the levels of material (physiological, safety), social (belongingness, esteem), and spiritual. Mathes proposed the three levels were physiological, belonginess, and self-actualization; he considered security and self-esteem as unwarranted. Alderfer (1972) developed a comparable hierarchy with his ERG (existence, relatedness, and growth) theory. His approach modified Maslow's theory based on the work of Gordon Allport (1960, 1961) who incorporated concepts from systems theory into his work on personality.
Alderfer's Hierarchy of Motivational Needs
Level of Need
|Impel a person to make creative or productive effects on himself and his environment||Satisfied through using capabilities in engaging problems; creates a greater sense of wholeness and fullness as a human being|
|Involve relationships with significant others||Satisfied by mutually sharing thoughts and feelings; acceptance, confirmation, under- standing, and influence are elements|
|Includes all of the various forms of material and psychological desires||When divided among people one person's gain is another's loss if resources are limited|
Maslow recognized that not all personalities followed his proposed hierarchy. While a variety of personality dimensions might be considered as related to motivational needs, one of the most often cited is that of introversion and extroversion. Reorganizing Maslow's hierarchy based on the work of Alderfer and considering the introversion/extraversion dimension of personality results in three levels, each with an introverted and extroverted component. This organization suggests there may be two aspects of each level that differentiate how people relate to each set of needs. Different personalities might relate more to one dimension than the other. For example, an introvert at the level of Other/Relatedness might be more concerned with his or her own perceptions of being included in a group, whereas an extrovert at that same level would pay more attention to how others value that membership.
A Reorganization of Maslow's and Alderfer's Hierarchies
|Growth||Self-Actualization (development of competencies [knowledge, attitudes, and skills] and character)||Transcendence (assisting in the development of others' competencies and character; relationships to the unknown, unknowable)|
|Personal identification with group, significant others (Belongingness)||Value of person by group (Esteem)|
|Physiological, biological (including basic emotional needs)||Connectedness, security|
At this point there is little agreement about the identification of basic human needs and how they are ordered. For example, Ryan & Deci (2000) also suggest three needs, although they are not necessarily arranged hierarchically: the need for autonomy, the need for competence, and the need for relatedness. Thompson, Grace and Cohen (2001) state the most important needs for children are connection, recognition, and power. Nohria, Lawrence, and Wilson (2001) provide evidence from a sociobiology theory of motivation that humans have four basic needs: (1) acquire objects and experiences; (2) bond with others in long-term relationships of mutual care and commitment; (3) learn and make sense of the world and of ourselves; and (4) to defend ourselves, our loved ones, beliefs and resources from harm. The Institute for Management Excellence (2001) suggests there are nine basic human needs: (1) security, (2) adventure, (3) freedom, (4) exchange, (5) power, (6) expansion, (7) acceptance, (8) community, and (9) expression.
Notice that bonding and relatedness are a component of every theory. However, there do not seem to be any others that are mentioned by all theorists. Franken (2001) suggests this lack of accord may be a result of different philosophies of researchers rather than differences among human beings. In addition, he reviews research that shows a person's explanatory or attributional style will modify the list of basic needs. Therefore, it seems appropriate to ask people what they want and how their needs could be met rather than relying on an unsupported theory. For example, Waitley (1996) advises having a person imagine what life would be like if time and money were not an object in a person's life. That is, what would the person do this week, this month, next month, if he or she had all the money and time needed to engage in the activities and were secure that both would be available again next year. With some follow-up questions to identify what is keeping the person from happening now, this open-ended approach is likely to identify the most important needs of the individual.
There is much work still to be done in this area before we can rely on a theory to be more informative than simply collecting and analyzing data. However, this body of research can be very important to parents, educators, administrators and others concerned with developing and using human potential. It provides an outline of some important issues that must be addressed if human beings are to achieve the levels of character and competencies necessary to be successful in the information age.
Maslow's work lead to additional attempts to develop a grand theory of motivation, a theory that would put all of the factors influencing motivation into one model. An example is provided by Leonard, Beauvais, and Scholl (1995). These authors propose 5 factors as the sources of motivation: 1) Instrumental Motivation (rewards and punishers), 2) Intrinsic Process Motivation (enjoyment, fun), 3) Goal Internalization (self-determined values and goals), 4) Internal Self Concept-based Motivation (matching behavior with internally-developed ideal self), 5) External Self Concept-based Motivation (matching behavior with externally-developed ideal self). Individuals are influenced by all five factors, though in varying degrees that can change in specific situations.
Factors one and five are both externally-oriented. The main difference is that individuals who are instrumentally motivated are influenced more by immediate actions in the environment (e.g. operant conditioning) whereas individuals who are self-concept motivated are influenced more by their constructions of external demands and ideals (e.g., social cognition).
Factors two, three, and four are more internally-oriented. In the case of intrinsic process, the specific task is interesting and provides immediate internal reinforcement (e.g., cognitive or humanistic theory). The individual with a goal-internalization orientation is more task-oriented (e.g., humanistic or social cognition theory) whereas the person with an internal self-concept orientation is more influenced by individual constructions of the ideal self (humanistic or psychoanalytic theory).
Social learning (or observational) theory suggests that modeling (imitating others) and vicarious learning (watching others have consequences applied to their behavior) are important motivators of behavior.
Social cognition theory proposes reciprocal determination as a primary factor in both learning and motivation. In this view, the environment, an individual's behavior, and the individual's characteristics (e.g., knowledge, emotions, cognitive development) both influence and are influenced by each other two components. Bandura (1986, 1997) highlights self-efficacy (the belief that a particular action is possible and that the individual can accomplish it) and self-regulation (the establishment of goals, the development of a plan to attain those goals, the commitment to implement that plan, the actual implementation of the plan, and subsequent actions of reflection and modification or redirection. The work of Ames (1992) and Dweck (1986) discussed below is a major component of social cognitive views on motivation.
Transpersonal or Spiritual Theories
Most of the transpersonal or spiritual theories deal with the meaningfulness of our lives or ultimate meanings. Abraham Maslow (1954) has also been influential in this approach to motivation. Other influential scholars included Gordon Allport (1955), Victor Frankl (1998), William James (1997), Carl Jung (1953, 1997), Ken Wilber (1998).
One classification of motivation differentiates among achievement, power, and social factors (see McClelland, 1985; Murray, 1938, 1943). In the area of achievement motivation, the work on goal-theory has differentiated three separate types of goals: mastery goals (also called learning goals) which focus on gaining competence or mastering a new set of knowledge or skills; performance goals (also called ego-involvement goals) which focus on achieving normative-based standards, doing better than others, or doing well without a lot of effort; and social goals which focus on relationships among people (see Ames, 1992; Dweck, 1986; Urdan & Maehr, 1995). In the context of school learning, which involves operating in a relatively structured environment, students with mastery goals outperform students with either performance or social goals. However, in life success, it seems critical that individuals have all three types of goals in order to be very successful.
One aspect of this theory is that individuals are motivated to either avoid failure (more often associated with performance goals) or achieve success (more often associated with mastery goals). In the former situation, the individual is more likely to select easy or difficult tasks, thereby either achieving success or having a good excuse for why failure occurred. In the latter situation, the individual is more likely to select moderately difficult tasks which will provide an interesting challenge, but still keep the high expectations for success.
Impacting motivation in the classroom
Stipek (1988) suggests there are a variety of reasons why individuals may be lacking in motivation and provides a list of specific behaviors associated with high academic achievement. This is an excellent checklist to help students develop the conative component of their lives. In addition, as stated previously in these materials, teacher efficacy is a powerful input variable related to student achievement (Proctor, 1984).
There are a variety of specific actions that teachers can take to increase motivation on classroom tasks. In general, these fall into the two categories discussed above: intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation.
As a general rule, teachers need to use as much of the intrinsic suggestions as possible while recognizing that not all students will be appropriately motivated by them. The extrinsic suggestions will work, but it must be remembered that they do so only as long as the student is under the control of the teacher. When outside of that control, unless the desired goals and behaviors have been internalized, the learner will cease the desired behavior and operate according to his or her internal standards or to other external factors.
- Adler, A. (1989). Individual psychology of Alfred Adler: A systematic presentation in selections from his writings. New York: HarperCollins.
- Alderfer, C. (1972). Existence, relatedness, & growth. New York: Free Press.
- Allport, G. (1955). Becoming: Basic considerations for a psychology of personality. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ Press.
- Allport, G. (1960). Personality and social encounter: Selected essays. New York: Beacon Press.
- Allport, G. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
- Ames, C. (1992). Classroom goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261-271.
- Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
- Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.
- Daniels, M. (2001). Maslows's concept of self-actualization. Retrieved February 2004, from http://www.mdani.demon.co.uk/archive/MDMaslow.htm
- Dweck, C. (1986) Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist. 41(10), 1040-1048.
- Erikson, E. (1993). Childhood and society. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
- Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
- Frankl, V. (1998). Man's search for meaning (Revised ed.). New York: Washington Square Press.
- Franken, R. (1994). Human motivation. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
- Franken, R. (2001). Human motivation (5th ed.).. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
- Freud, S. (1990). Beyond the pleasure principle. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
- Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
- Institute for Management Excellence. (2001). The nine basic human needs. Online Newsletter. Retrieved February 2004, from http://www.itstime.com/print/jun97p.htm
- Izard, C. (1990). Facial expressions and the regulation of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 487-498.
- James, W. (1892/1962). Psychology: Briefer course. New York: Collier.
- James, W. (1997). The varieties of religious experience (Reprint ed.). New York: Macmillan.
- Jung, C. (1953). Modern man in search of a soul. New York: Harcourt Brace.
- Jung, C. (1997). Man and his symbols (reissue). New York: Laurelleaf.
- Kleinginna, P., Jr., & Kleinginna A. (1981a). A categorized list of motivation definitions, with suggestions for a consensual definition. Motivation and Emotion, 5, 263-291.
- Kleinginna, P., Jr., & Kleinginna A. (1981b). A categorized list of emotion definitions, with suggestions for a consensual definition. Motivation and Emotion, 5, 345-379.
- Leonard, N., Beauvais, L., & Scholl, R. (1995). A self-concept-based model on work motivation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, August. Retrieved: December 1999, from http://www.cba.uri.edu/Scholl/Papers/Self_Concept_Motivation.HTM
- Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370-396. Retrieved June 2001, from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm
- Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.
- Maslow, A. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature. New York: The Viking Press.
- Maslow, A., & Lowery, R. (Ed.). (1998). Toward a psychology of being (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley & Sons.
- Mathes, E. (1981, Fall). Maslow's hierarchy of needs as a guide for living. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 21, 69-72.
- McClelland, D. (1985). Human motivation. New York: Scott, Foresman.
- Murray, H. (1938, 1943). Explorations in personality. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Nohria, N., Lawrence, P., & Wilson, E. (2001). Driven: How human nature shapes our choices. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Norwood, G. (1999). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. The Truth Vectors (Part I). Retrieved May 2002, from http://www.deepermind.com/20maslow.htm
- Proctor, C. (1984, March). Teacher expectations: A model for school improvement. The Elementary School Journal, 469-481.
- Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. Retrieved February 2004, from http://www.psych.rochester.edu/SDT/publications/documents/2000RyanDeciSDT.pdf
- Seligman, M. (1990). Learned optimism. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
- Soper, B., Milford, G., & Rosenthal, G. (1995). Belief when evidence does not support theory. Psychology & Marketing, 12(5), 415-422.
- Stipek, D. (1988). Motivation to learn: From theory to practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
- Sullivan, H. S. (1968). The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
- Thompson, M., Grace, C., & Cohen, L. (2001). Best friends, worst enemies: Understanding the social lives of children. New York: Ballantine Books.
- Urdan, T., & Maehr, M. (1995). Beyond a two-goal theory of motivation and achievement: A case for social goals. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 213-243.
- Vroom, V. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
- Wahba, A., & Bridgewell, L. (1976). Maslow reconsidered: A review of research on the need hierarchy theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 15, 212-240.
- Waitley, D. (1996). The new dynamics of goal setting: Flextactics for a fast-changing world. New York: William Morrow.
- Weiner, B. (1974). Achievement motivation and attribution theory. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
- Yerkes, R., & Dodson, J. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459-482. Retrieved December 1999, from http://www.yorku.ca/dept/psych/classics/Yerkes/Law/
| Internet Resources | Electronic Files |
Return to: | EdPsyc
Interactive: Courses | Home Page |