Theories of Motivation.

Marcelle Cruise

THEORIES OF MOTIVATION

OUTLINE:

Introduction
Atkinson’s need-achievement theory
Schacter’s cognitive arousal theory
Festinger’s cognitive dissonance theory
Conclusion

I – INTRODUCTION

The contemporary literature concerned with the human motivation processes can be described as a collection of “miniature theories”, each concerned with understanding and predicting behavior under a very limited set of conditions. This approach is contrasted with the global efforts of early personality theorists like Freud and Murray who attempted to develop more general theories of human motivation. The trend toward the miniature theory in this area can be understood as an attempt to develop theoretical concepts more precisely defined and testable than those provided by traditional personality theory.

II – ATKINSON’S NEED-ACHIEVEMENT THEORY

Atkinson borrows the concept of need-achievement motivation from Murray’s (1938) personality theory and proceeds to develop a theory around this concept. Atkinson suggests that the tendency to approach any situation is a function of 2 factors – hope for success (Ts) and fear of failure (Taf).

It is basically an approach or positive source of motivation. Atkinson defines Ts as follows: Ts = Ms x Ps x Is.

Ms is a relatively stable personality trait initially proposed as one of Murray’s 20 psychogenic needs was called the need for achievement (n Ach). Individuals who have a high need for achievement motive are characterized as having a very strong desire to perform well in competitive situations such as school, to do things quickly and independently and to always strive to excel or get ahead in the world. The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) measures an individual’s level of achievement motivation. This test was developed by Murray (1938, and falls into the general category of testing instruments known as projective tests. This test consists of showing and individual a series of ambiguous human scenes and asking him to white a brief story about each scene. An individual can score from 1 to 10 on the test with 10 representing a very high level of need achievement motivation and 1 very low. The score received on the TAT is the Ms value to be inserted into the equation.

Ps is the individual’s subjective estimate of the probability of success at the task. It is the assumed cognitive factor in Atkinson’s theorizing. It is an attempt to qualify your expectancy concerning the outcome if a particular course of action is chosen.

Is is the incentive value associated with success. According to Atkinson, it is the feeling of pride or value associated with achieving a goal. He defines ‘Is’ as 1 – Ps. It suggests that the value or pride associated with succeeding at a very difficult task is greater than the value or pride associated with succeeding at an easy task.

Atkinson also assumes that fear of failure also affects your choice behavior. It is a negative source of motivation that represents the tendency to avoid the task. He defines Taf as follows: Taf = Maf x Pf x ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Maf is another stable personality trait that Atkinson assumes characterizes most of us to varying degrees. This trait is essentially an indication of the anxiety you have when approaching a task at which you could fail. Individuals who are high in Maf tend to be nervous and generally ‘high-strung’. The Madler-Sarason Test Anxiety Questionnaire (TAQ) is an objective self-report measure of anxiety that consists of questions concerning your nervous reactions to various situations. This score is the Maf score, which ranges from 1 to 10, with a score of 10 representing a very anxious, and 1 representing a calm and collected person.

Pf is the subjective probability that you will fail at the task. Atkinson assumes at Pf and Ps must equal unity (i.e. – Ps + Pf = 1).

If is the incentive value of failure. In common sense terms, it is meant t be an estimate of the amount of shame or embarrassment associated with failure. Atkinson defines ‘If’ as – 1 – Ps. It suggests that the amount of embarrassment you feel over failure at a difficult task is greater the easier the goal was supposed to be.

Thus, Atkinson assumes that an individual’s need for achievement motivation is the algebraic sum of Mtot = Ts + (- Taf).

Advantages –

Atkinson’s theory is capable of making very precise predictions about human choice behavior in situations.
The theoretical concepts such as Ts and Taf are also precisely defined in terms of the operations necessary to measure them.
One must conclude, therefore, that, that Atkinson ahs managed to take concepts from the realm of traditional personality theory and demonstrate that such concepts can be used as central ideas in a testable theoretical position designed to predict some aspects of human behavior.

Disadvantages –

Although this theory is capable of making very precise, quantitative predictions, it will only make these predictions under a very limited set of conditions. He specifically states that the theory should be applied only in situations that meet the following 3 conditions:

There must be some risk involved in making the choice so that the hope for success and the fear of failure are meaningful concepts.
The individual must feel responsible for the outcome
The individual must know the outcome of his choice immediately.

A number of other less obvious problems with the theory add further limitations to the conditions under which precise predictions can be made.

The theory faces the problem of explaining why high Maf, low Ms subjects approach competitive situations at all. Atkinson’s answer to this problem is to suggest that choices made by such individuals are motivated by factors other than Ms and Maf that he calls ‘extrinsic factors’. These factors are assumed to motivate choice behavior in individuals with equal Ms and Maf scores.
The theory ignores factors such as financial gains and other benefits. Many situations meet the boundary conditions specified by Atkinson but contain factors other than Ms, Maf and Ps acting as a more powerful basis for predicting behavior. Again, Atkinson can appeal to the extrinsic motivation factors to explain the outcome, but only after the fact. Unlike Atkinson, Slovic and Lichenstein (1968), have proposed a model that emphasizes 4 factors for achievement motivation – the amount of money to be won, the amount of money to be lost, the probability of winning and the probability of losing.
Previous success or failure at a task will modify one’s future performance. Weiner (1965) showed that this can have pronounced effects upon subsequent behaviors in the same or a different achievement related situation and such data has prompted Atkinson and Cartwright (1970) to modify the initial theoretical formulation to include a factor called inertial motivation that will take the effects of previous success or failure into account when making subsequent predictions.

Thus the theory is perhaps the best example of a precise, testable miniature theory in the area of human motivation research that finds it’s roots in traditional personality theory and the precision of the theory is perhaps spurious (false) in that it seems to lose in generality what it gains in terms of precise predictions.

III – SCHACHTER’S COGNITIVE-AROUSAL THEORY

The general emotional reaction we experience in many situations is capable of motivating some impressive emotional patterns of behavior. Schachter et al (1962) initially outlined a miniature theory intended to deal specifically with the changes in behavior that occur in response to changes in the activity of the autonomous system. Basically Schachter suggests that highly motivated emotional behavior is controlled by a combination of 2 factors:

The individual’s general state of physiological arousal
The individual’s cognitions or thought processes.

Schachter refers primarily to physiological arousal associated with increased activity in the sympathetic component of the autonomic nervous system. A general activation of the sympathetic nervous system produces such changes in physiological functioning as rapid breathing, increased heart rate, palpitations and tremors. He also suggests that, given the presence of such a physiological state, cognitive thought processes will determine how one perceives or interprets these physiological changes. E.g. If you are talking with a very attractive member of the opposite sex and you experience an increase in sympathetic arousal, the physiological change will very likely be interpreted as sexual arousal. Cognitive factors are assumed to account for the differential emotional arousal in these 2 conditions and the different behaviors appropriate to each emotional reaction.

There are at least 2 basic implications of the position proposed by Schachter:

Emotional behavior is not possible unless a physiological state of arousal has developed.
A given physiological state of arousal can be interpreted in a number of ways.

In their classic study 184 subjects participated in an experiment falsely portrayed as a test of the effects of the vitamin Supproxin upon visual function. Some subjects were injected with the drug epinephrine (a sympathomimetic drug that activates the sympathetic nervous system producing changes in physiological arousal) while others were injected with an inert placebo physiological saline that had no obvious physiological effects upon the subjects. Following the injections, some of the subjects were exposed to a social situation contrived to induce anger and the other subjects were exposed to a social situation contrived to produce euphoria. As predicted, measures of the subject’s attitudes and general behavior indicated that the subjects reacted to the physiological arousal produced by the epinephrine in terms of either anger or euphoria depending upon the contrived conditions to which they subsequently exposed. In the placebo control group, the procedure failed to induce either anger or euphoria.

Thus, Schachter is suggesting that out thoughts dictate the way in which we interpret physiological changes in our autonomic nervous system. The same physiological change can, under the appropriate conditions, be interpreted as lust, anger, fear or euphoria. Schachter’s theory also predicts certain qualitative changes in the individual’s behavior, whereas Atkinson’s theory is capable of more precise quantitative predictions.

The failure to precisely define theoretical concepts in terms of specified operations often generates experimentation dealing with a wider range of phenomena that found with more precise, quantitative theories. This point is very well illustrated by the recent extension of Schachter’s basic ideas to the motivational state of ‘hunger’ as studied in both obese and normal weight individuals. Their results support the notion that normal weight individuals have the ability to label their internal physiological state (hunger v/s satisfaction) and ignore cognitive an environmental input that signal them to eat. The obese person, however, appears to ignore the physiological state and eating behavior is controlled largely by external factors such as the ready availability of the food.

Nisbett (1968) reported similar results indicating again that the obese individual is unresponsive to internal deprivation states but highly responsive to external factors such as the taste of food. Goldman et al (1968) similarly reported that fat students are less tolerant of typically bad dormitory food than normal weight students.

One cannot deny that Schachter’s research over the last decade has indicated that cognitive factors can exercise considerable control over physiological motivational states. Indeed, there is every indication that the basic ideas first outlined by Schachter and Singer (1962) will be applied to an increasing number of motivational phenomena.