case study on motivation

Contact us: [email protected]

© © Copyright - All Right Reserved By themotivationcompass.com

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Affective Science
• Biological Foundations of Psychology
• Clinical Psychology: Disorders and Therapies
• Cognitive Psychology/Neuroscience
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational/School Psychology
• Forensic Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems of Psychology
• Individual Differences
• Methods and Approaches in Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational and Institutional Psychology
• Personality
• Psychology and Other Disciplines
• Social Psychology
• Sports Psychology
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Motivation in sport and performance.

• Glyn C. Roberts , Glyn C. Roberts Department of Coaching and Psychology, Norwegian School of Sport Science
• Christina G. L. Nerstad Christina G. L. Nerstad Department of Public Administration and Leadership, Oslo Metropolitan University
•  and  P. Nicolas Lemyre P. Nicolas Lemyre Department of Coaching and Psychology, Norwegian School of Sport Science
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.150
• Published online: 30 July 2018

Motivation is the largest single topic in psychology, with at least 32 theories that attempt to explain why people are or are not motivated to achieve. Within sport psychology research, there are a plethora of techniques of how to increase and sustain motivation (strategies to enhance agency beliefs, self-regulation, goal setting, and others). However, when explaining the conceptual undergirding of motivation in sport, the why of motivation, two theories predominate: Achievement Goal Theory (AGT) and Self-Determination Theory (SDT). Both theories predict the same outcomes, such as increased achievement striving, sustained behavior change, and perceptions of well-being, but they differ in why those outcomes occur. AGT assumes that individuals cognitively evaluate the competence demands and meaningfulness of the activity, and that those perceptions govern behavior. SDT assumes that individuals are driven by three basic needs, competence, autonomy, and relatedness, and the satisfaction of those needs govern behavior. The following discusses both theories and concludes that each has their strengths and weaknesses.

• achievement orientations
• basic needs
• motivational climate
• behavior change
• Achievement Goal Theory
• Self-Determination Theory

Introduction

We can never have equality of achievement, but we can have equality of motivation : That was the mission of John Nicholls ( 1979 ). His goal was “equality of optimal motivation” (p. 1071) so that everyone should achieve the best that is possible for him or her to fulfill their potential. This enshrines the conceptual basis of enhancing motivation for sustained behavior change evident in the extant literature. For optimal motivation, it is argued that strategies need to be developed where individuals adopt and sustain achievement striving. Whether it is business leaders trying to motivate people in the workplace, the health industry trying to halt the rise in childhood obesity and sedentary lifestyles, parents and teachers bemoaning the study habits of children and adolescents, or coaches and administrators within the sport and performance communities wondering how to get better “results,” all are concerned with the issue of sustained motivated behavior.

How do we develop motivation for sustained striving? If we take our cues from everyday life, then it may be associated with arousal, such as the “motivational” tirades of coaches in the locker room. Former players of Manchester United Football Club have often remarked about the halftime locker room “hairdryer treatment” talks of the legendary coach of Manchester United Sir Alex Ferguson. Some believe it is a measure of confidence, a winning attitude that motivates one to better performance. Some believe it is a simple matter of positive thinking: Believe and you will achieve! Some believe it is a personal entity or is genetically endowed; you either “have it, or not”! However, these beliefs do not begin to capture the complexity and richness of contemporary motivational theory and research.

The term motivation is a very overused and vague term, especially in the “trenches”—the classroom, the gymnasium, the exercise room, the playing fields, the sport arenas, the workplace, etc. (e.g., Ford, 1992 ; Roberts, 2012 ; Roberts, Treasure, & Conroy, 2007 ). We have former successful sports stars, politicians, businesspeople who earn “big bucks” on the lecture circuit giving what are termed “motivational talks”! We have sports commentators and business correspondents who argue that the successful are more motivated to achieve than the unsuccessful. But their definitions and understanding of what motivation is differs. Even among motivation researchers, motivation is defined broadly by some, and narrowly by others, so that the term is useless as an organizing construct. Ford ( 1992 ) has argued that there are at least 32 theories of motivation that have their own definitions and explanations of the construct. In contemporary motivation research, because the term is so vague, the solution has been to abandon the term and use descriptions of cognitive processes such as self-regulation or other self-systems that affect motivational processes. However, the important assumption agreed to by most contemporary theorists is that motivation is not an entity but is a process (e.g., Maehr & Braskamp, 1986 ). Typically, motivation is the process that influences the initiation, direction, magnitude, perseverance, continuation, and quality of goal-directed behavior (Maehr & Zusho, 2009 ). To understand motivation, we must attempt to understand the process of motivation and the constructs that drive the process and how they apply to sustained behavior change.

The history of motivation theory has been the search for the overarching theory, and, as such, it was assumed that when that theory evolved, a whole range of achievement behaviors would not only be better understood, but intervention opportunities would also present themselves (Roberts, 1992 , 2012 ). Despite the efforts of many, and the arguments of some (e.g., Bandura, 1986 ), this overarching theory remains elusive and certainly not within our grasp yet. One of the reasons is that there is not universal agreement on how the psyche works to foster motivation. However, the search continues. There is excellent work in both sport and other achievement arenas that are ongoing in search of theoretical concepts and processes to understand and enhance achievement behaviors.

The study of motivation and its effect on achievement behavior is the investigation of the energization, direction, and regulation of behavior. Thus, while some avenues of research that describe the direction and/or the regulation of behavior without specifying why the behavior is energized are not “true” motivational theories, even though they may describe achievement behavior very well. Goal setting is such a case in sport and performance (e.g., Locke & Latham, 1985 ). Goal setting specifies the direction and regulation of achievement behavior, but to date there is no sufficient psychological explanation to explain why behavior from a goal-setting perspective is initiated (Hall & Kerr, 2001 ). Motivation theories are predicated upon a set of assumptions about individuals and about the factors that give impetus to achievement behavior (Roberts, 1992 ). Motivation theories ask why .

Typically, in the research literature pertaining to motivation in sport and performance, motivation theories refer to needs, dispositions, social variables, and/or cognitions that come into play when a person undertakes a task at which he or she is evaluated, enters into competition with others, or attempts to attain some standard of excellence. At such times, the individual is assumed to be responsible for the outcome of the task and that some level of challenge is inherent in the task. Moreover, such circumstances are assumed to facilitate various needs, motivational dispositions, and/or cognitive assessments that affect achievement striving. Specifically, it has been hypothesized that the energizing constructs of achievement behavior are basic needs, approach and/or avoidance dispositions, expectancies, incentive values of success and failure, and/or cognitive assessments of what it takes to achieve success and/or avoid failure.

Understanding the Process of Motivation

Motivation theories are on a continuum ranging from deterministic to mechanistic to organismic to cognitive (for a more extensive treatment of motivation theories, see Ford, 1992 ). Deterministic and mechanistic theories view humans as being passive, at least partially, and driven by psychological needs and/or drives. Organismic theories include innate needs but also recognize that a dialectic occurs between the organism and the social context. Social cognitive theories view humans as being active and initiating action through subjective interpretation of the achievement context. When motivation matters, theoretical models governing motivation and achievement behavior abound. There is no shortage of theories! However, since the late 1970s, theories that encompass social cognitive dynamics have dominated the research literature.

Weiner ( 1972 ) signaled the beginning of the cognitive revolution by arguing that individuals who were high or low in motivation were likely to think differently about why success and failure occurred. The notion that thoughts, rather than needs or drives, were the critical variables transformed the study of motivation. As Harwood, Spray, and Keegan ( 2008 ) stated, the development of social cognitive theories has been a watershed for our understanding of sport achievement behavior. Harwood and colleagues continue to state that achievement goal theory, in particular, has “triggered a penetrating wave of research into the interpersonal and environmental influences on athlete behavior in achievement settings” (p. 158). The majority of motivation research in sport performance contexts over the past 40 years has adopted a social cognitive approach, at least partially. The most popular contemporary theories in sport psychology tend to be based on organismic (e.g., Self-Determination theory, Deci & Ryan, 1985 ; Hierarchical goal model, Elliot, 1999 ) or social cognitive criteria (e.g., Achievement Goal Theory, Nicholls, 1989 ) and are based on the more dynamic and sophisticated conceptions that assume the human is an active participant in decision making and in planning achievement.

We have confined our review to include only the most important theories for sport and performance. It may be debated whether we have included all of the important theories. However, even a cursory review of the motivation literature in sport immediately reveals that the most cited theories are Achievement Goal Theory (e.g., Dweck, 2006 ; Nicholls, 1989 ) and Self-Determination Theory (e.g., Deci & Ryan, 1985 ). These are the most used theories in the sport and performance arena. Thus, for sport performance, we take a critical eye to Self-Determination Theory (SDT) (e.g., Ntoumanis, 2012 ; Standage & Ryan, 2012 ) and Achievement Goal Theory (AGT) (e.g., Duda, 2001 ; Roberts, 2001 , 2012 ) and their principal advocates.

We will discuss each theory in turn and identify the process of motivation within each, and we will briefly cite the research in sport and performance to support the basic tenets and findings. Then we will discuss the similarities and differences of each theory and conclude with a series of suggestions for future research in sport and performance contexts.

The Theories

First, we will discuss AGT in its various guises.

Achievement Goal Theory and Research

The history and development of AGT in sport has been reviewed in several recent publications (e.g., Duda, 2005 ; Duda & Hall, 2001 ; Harwood et al., 2008 ; Lochbaum, Kazak Cetinkalp, Graham, Wright, & Zazo, 2016 ; Roberts, 2012 ; Roberts Treasure, & Conroy, 2007 ). We will not exhaustively review the literature in the present article, rather we will focus on identifying key constructs, tenets, and constraints to the theory; review the basic conceptual infrastructure and empirical support; and present recent proposals for expanding and/or restructuring the approach, with some rebuttals and counterpoints! AGT is a social cognitive theory that assumes that the individual is an intentional, rational, goal-directed organism and that achievement goals govern achievement beliefs and guide subsequent decision making and behavior in achievement contexts. It is these goals that reflect the purposes of achievement striving. Once adopted, the achievement goal determines the integrated pattern of beliefs that energize approach and avoid strategies, the differing engagement levels, and the differing responses to achievement outcomes. Goals are what give an activity purpose or meaning (Kaplan & Maehr, 2007 ; Maehr & Nicholls, 1980 ). By recognizing the importance of the meaning of behavior, it becomes clear that there may be multiple goals of action, not one (Maehr & Braskamp, 1986 ). Thus, an individual’s investment of personal resources such as effort, talent, and time in an activity is dependent on the achievement goal of the individual.

The overall goal of action in AGT, thereby becoming the conceptual energizing force, is the desire to develop and demonstrate competence and to avoid demonstrating incompetence in an achievement context (Nicholls, 1984 ). However, competence has more than one meaning. Based on previous research on learned helplessness (Dweck, 1975 ), cooperation/competition (Ames, 1984 ), and his own work on children’s understanding of the concepts of effort and ability ( 1976 ), Nicholls’s conceptual contribution was to argue that more than one conception of ability exists, and that achievement goals and behavior may differ depending on the conception of ability held by the person. Two conceptions of ability (at least) manifest themselves in achievement contexts, namely an undifferentiated concept of ability , where ability and effort are not differentiated by the individual; and a differentiated concept of ability , where ability and effort are differentiated (Nicholls, 1984 , 1989 ).

Nicholls ( 1978 , 1989 ) argued that children originally possess an undifferentiated conception of ability and associate ability with learning through effort so that the more effort one puts forth, the more learning (and ability) one achieves. Following a series of experiments, Nicholls ( 1978 ; Nicholls & Miller, 1983 , 1984 ) determined that by the age of 12, children are able to differentiate luck, task difficulty, and effort from ability, enabling a differentiated perspective. When utilizing this differentiated perspective, children begin to see ability as capacity and that the demonstration of competence involves outperforming others. In terms of effort, high ability is inferred when outperforming others and expending equal or less effort or performing equal to others while expending less effort.

An individual will approach a task or activity with certain goals of action reflecting their personal perceptions and beliefs about the form of ability they wish to demonstrate (Nicholls, 1984 , 1989 ). They interpret their performance in terms of these perceptions and beliefs and form a personal theory of achievement at the activity (Nicholls, 1989 ) that reflects the individual’s perception of how things work in achievement situations. The adopted personal theory of achievement (Dweck, 2006 , terms this as an implicit person theory ) affects one’s beliefs about how to achieve success and avoid failure at the activity. Therefore, based on their personal theory of achievement, people will differ in which of the conceptions of ability and criteria of success and failure they use.

State of Involvement

The two conceptions of ability thereby become the source of the criteria by which individuals assess success and failure. The goals of action are to meet the criteria. Nicholls ( 1989 ) identifies achievement behavior utilizing the undifferentiated conception of ability as being task involved and achievement behavior utilizing the differentiated conception of ability as being ego involved .

When task involved, the goal of action is to develop mastery, improvement, or learning; and the demonstration of ability is self-referenced, internal, and autonomous. Success is realized when mastery or improvement is attained. Perceived ability becomes less relevant as the individual is trying to demonstrate or develop mastery at the task rather than demonstrate normative ability. The achievement behaviors are adaptive in that the individual is more likely to persist in the face of failure, to exert effort, select challenging tasks, and be intrinsically interested in the task (e.g., Duda & Hall, 2001 ; Nicholls, 1989 ; Roberts, 2012 ).

When ego involved, the goal of action is to demonstrate ability relative to others, or to outperform others, making ability other referenced and external. Success is realized when the performance of others is exceeded, especially when expending less effort (Nicholls, 1984 , 1989 ). Perceived ability is relevant as the individual is trying to demonstrate normative ability, or avoid demonstrating inability, to determine how his/her ability fares with comparative others. These people seek competitive contests and want to demonstrate superiority. When perceived ability is high, demonstrating high-normative ability is likely; therefore, the individual is motivated to persist and demonstrate that competence to pertinent others. The ego-involved person is inclined to use the least amount of effort to realize the goal of action (Nicholls, 1989 ). If the perception of ability is low, then the individual recognizes that ability is unlikely to be demonstrated, and he/she manifests maladaptive achievement behaviors because he/she wishes to avoid demonstrating incompetence (Nicholls, 1989 ). Maladaptive behaviors are avoiding the task; avoiding challenge; reducing persistence in the face of difficulty; exerting little effort; and, in sport, even dropping out if achievement of the desired goal appears difficult. These people avoid competitive contests, as their lack of competence may be exposed. While the participant may view these avoidance behaviors as adaptive, because a lack of ability is disguised, they are considered maladaptive in terms of achievement behavior.

One of the most important tenets of AGT is that the states of involvement are mutually exclusive (e.g., Nicholls, 1989 ; Treasure et al., 2001 ). One is either ego or task involved. One’s state of motivational involvement ranges on a continuum from task to ego involvement. The goal state is very dynamic and can change from moment to moment as information is processed (Gernigon, d’Arippe-Longueville, Delignières, & Ninot, 2004 ). An athlete may begin a task with strong task-involved motivation, but contextual events may make the athlete wish to demonstrate superiority to others, and the athlete becomes ego involved in the task (as an example, when a coach publicly highlights a mistake). Similarly, an athlete may begin a competitive event with a strong ego-involved state of involvement, but as the event unfolds, the athlete may realize he or she will win easily (or lose emphatically) and therefore begin to work on mastery criteria instead and become task involved. Thus, goal states are dynamic and ebb and flow depending on the perception of the athlete.

In this article, when we refer to the motivated state of involvement of the individual, we use the terms ego and task involvement to be consistent with Nicholls’s use of the terms. However, other theorists use different terms such as mastery and performance (e.g., Ames, 1992a ; Dweck, 1986 ). In addition, when we refer to individual dispositions, we use the terms task and ego orientation to be consistent with Nicholls. Again, other motivation theorists (e.g., Dweck, 1986 , 2006 ; Elliot, 1999 ; Maehr & Braskamp, 1986 ) have used different terms (e.g., self-schemas, personal theories of achievement, implicit personal theories, personal investment) to describe the same phenomena.

Goal Orientations, an Individual Difference Variable

When individuals are predisposed (e.g., through their personal theory of achievement) to act in an ego- or task-involved manner, these predispositions are called achievement goal orientations . Individual differences in the disposition to be ego or task involved may be the result of socialization through task or ego-involving contexts in the home or other significant achievement contexts (e.g., classrooms, sport). The way Elliott and Dweck ( 1988 ) explain it is that each of the achievement goals runs off a different “program with different commands, decision rules, and inference rules, and hence, with different cognitive, affective, and behavioral consequences. Each goal, in a sense, creates and organizes its own world—each evoking different thoughts and emotions and calling forth different behaviors” (p. 11).

Goal orientations are not “traits” or based on needs. They are cognitive schemas that are dynamic and subject to change as information pertaining to one’s performance on the task is processed. The orientations have some stability over time and are relatively enduring in sport (Duda & Whitehead, 1998 ; Roberts, Treasure, & Balague, 1998 ). Thus, being task or ego oriented refers to the inclination of the individual to be task or ego involved in sport.

The important attribute of achievement goal orientations is that they are orthogonal and independent. One can be high or low in each or both orientations at the same time. Based on developmental research with children, Nicholls ( 1989 ) concluded that by the age of 12, it is possible for an individual to be high or low in both task and ego goal orientation, or high in one and low in the other. In the sport and exercise literature, this orthogonality has been supported (e.g., Duda, 2001 ; Lemyre, Roberts, & Ommundsen, 2002 ; Lochbaum et al., 2016 ; Pensgaard & Roberts, 2000 ; Roberts, Treasure, & Kavussanu, 1996 ; Walling & Duda, 1995 ). For qualitative reviews, see Duda and Whitehead ( 1998 ), and Roberts ( 2012 ) and colleagues (Roberts, Treasure, & Kavussanu, 1997 ; Roberts, Treasure, & Conroy, 2007 ).

The implications of the orthogonality of goal orientations are important. The research evidence in sport suggests that individuals with high task and high ego or high task and low ego orientations have the most adaptive motivational profiles (e.g., Fox, Goudas, Biddle, Duda, & Armstrong, 1994 ; Hodge & Petlichkoff, 2000 ; Pensgaard & Roberts, 2002 ; Roberts, Treasure, & Kavussanu, 1996 ; Smith, Balaguer, & Duda, 2006 ). As one would expect, when an individual has been high in ego and low in task, or high in task and low in ego, then the findings are consistent with the findings reported above for task and ego orientation (task orientation is adaptive; ego orientation, especially when coupled with low perception of competence, is generally maladaptive). However, we find that high ego orientation when coupled with high (or moderate) task orientation is not maladaptive (e.g., Cumming, Hall, Harwood, & Gammage, 2002 ; Harwood, Cumming, & Fletcher, 2004 ; Pensgaard & Roberts, 2002 ; Smith et al., 2006 ; Wang & Biddle, 2001 ). Therefore, rather than focusing on whether an individual is task or ego oriented, it is important to consider the simultaneous combination of task and ego orientation (Kaplan & Maehr, 2007 ; Roberts et al., 2007 ).

The Research Evidence

Two strategies are used to determine the goal orientation profiles (high in each, high in one and low in the other, and low in each). One strategy has been to create the four profile groups through a mean or median split of the task and ego scores (e.g., Fox et al., 1994 ; Roberts et al., 1996 ). A weakness of this approach is that individuals may be misclassified. An alternative is to use cluster analysis to obtain the goal profiles (e.g., Hodge & Petlichkoff, 2000 ). Researchers in sport have used cluster analysis (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998 ) to investigate goal orientations and in general have supported the use of cluster analysis to produce the goal orientation profiles (e.g., Cumming et al., 2002 ; Harwood et al., 2004 ; Hodge & Petlichkoff, 2000 ; Smith et al., 2006 ; Wang & Biddle, 2001 ). The clusters have varied across these studies, but importantly, participants with high ego/high task and high task/moderate or low in ego goal orientations have consistently reported more desirable responses on the variables under study (e.g., greater imagery use, more physical activity, higher self-determination, better social relationships). Thus, the motivational implications of the orthogonality of goals are a very important attribute of AGT.

Elite athletes are likely to be high task and high ego (e.g., Pensgaard & Roberts, 2000 ) or high ego and low or moderate in task orientation. In sport, the individuals most at risk are the high ego and low task oriented. These are the people most likely to exhibit maladaptive motivation, drop out, and are the athletes most likely to burn out when they believe they cannot demonstrate competence (Lemyre, Roberts, & Stray-Gundersen, 2007 ). The low ego and low task people are the least motivated, and they may not even commit to achievement tasks. The important issue in the present discussion is that the orthogonality of the goal orientations has been demonstrated quite conclusively (see Lochbaum et al., 2016 ), and the orthogonality of the goals is an important factor determining sustained motivated behavior in sport. The avenue of research related to achievement goals in the context of sport and performance has demonstrated that individual differences in goal orientations are associated with different motivational processes and different achievement behaviors (e.g., Lemyre et al., 2007 ). In comprehensive previous reviews, the hypotheses pertinent to the goal orientations are consistently supported (e.g., Duda, 2001 ; Duda & Hall, 2001 ; Lochbaum et al., 2016 ; Roberts, 2001 , 2012 ). Task orientation is associated with adaptive achievement strategies, positive affect, well-being, less cheating, better performance, and intrinsic forms of motivation. Ego orientation is associated with maladaptive achievement strategies, negative affect, ill-being, and extrinsic forms of motivation.

Goal Orientations and Mindsets

Dweck ( 2012 ) differs from Nicholls somewhat in that she argues that one’s personal theory of motivation gives rise to implicit theories about how things work in achievement settings. Dweck ( 2000 ) agrees with Nicholls ( 1989 ) that there exist specific individual difference variables that stimulate the pursuit of different goals; such variables are implicit person theories (IPTs). These theories reflect beliefs individuals have about themselves and their assumptions about the plasticity of personal characteristics such as personality, abilities (e.g., athletic), and intelligence, which guides human behavior (Dweck, 1986 ). Because they are not explicitly enunciated in the mind of the individual holding them, these person theories are typically referred to as implicit (Burnette, O’Boyle, VanEpps, Pollack, & Finkel, 2013 ). Thus, IPTs portray schematic knowledge structures that include beliefs about the stability of a characteristic, which in turn classifies the way individuals assign meanings to various occasions (Burnette et al., 2013 ; Ross, 1989 ). According to Dweck ( 1986 , 2012 ), there are two such IPTs. An entity IPT, also referred to as a fixed mindset , assumes that personal attributes are entities that reside within individuals and cannot be changed much over time (Dweck, 2000 , 2012 ). Thus, a so-called entity theorist believes that individuals have given abilities that cannot really be changed or developed (Dweck, 2006 ).

On the other hand, incremental IPT, also referred to as a growth mindset , assumes that personal attributes are relatively changeable (Dweck, 1999 ). Thus, individuals with a growth mindset, also called incremental theorists, believe that with effort, guidance, and effective strategies, all individuals can develop and increase their abilities over time (Dweck, 1999 , 2006 ).

The two mindsets are operationalized in such a manner that individuals lie somewhere along a continuum between the fixed and growth mindset prototypes; thus, one of the implicit theories is likely to be dominant (Heslin & Vandewalle, 2008 ; Spray, Wang, Biddle, Chatzisarantis, & Warburton, 2006 ). Still, it should be noted that it may be possible and beneficial for individuals to hold a combination of both growth and fixed mindsets (Dweck & Leggett, 1988 ; Harwood, Spray, & Keegan, 2008 ): That is, when present differences in relative ability are recognized, but blended with an emphasis on individual growth in ability (Dweck & Elliot, 1983 ; Dweck & Leggett, 1988 ). Sport psychological research has provided support for this suggestion given the typically negative, but weak, relationship between higher-ordered growth and fixed mindset dimensions (Biddle, Wang, Chatzisarantis, & Spray, 2003 ; Spray et al., 2006 ; Wang, Woon, Biddle, & Spray, 2005 ).

The IPTs (or mindsets) are relatively stable dispositions, and empirical evidence supports such a conceptualization (Dweck, 1999 ; Dweck, Chiu, & Hong, 1995 ; Dweck & Leggett, 1988 ). However, there is also empirical evidence indicating that IPTs may be modified through interventions where changes in IPTs and behavior have been found to sustain for periods of six to nine weeks (e.g., Aronson, Fried, & Good, 2002 ; Heslin, Latham, & Vandewalle, 2005 ).

IPTs (or mindsets) have been studied comprehensively in the educational achievement domain typically with experimental designs, although scholars have extended the IPT applicability to other domains such as work (Heslin & Vandewalle, 2008 ) and sport/physical education (Ommundsen, 2003 ; Spray et al., 2006 ). Accordingly mindsets have been shown to be important for success in various domains such as physical and emotional health, in social relationships, in academics, and in the workplace (Dweck, 2012 ). In sport, existing research has mainly been conducted with student participants, and thus IPTs have typically been measured with reference to physical education and sport where the majority of studies have been cross-sectional (Harwood et al., 2008 ), with a few exceptions (e.g., Spray et al., 2006 ). In the next paragraph, we will briefly present the main findings from various achievement domains, focusing on sport, physical education, and education.

Research based on diverse populations suggests that individuals can hold different IPTs in different domains such as in sport or schoolwork; growth and fixed mindsets are endorsed approximately equally; further, IPTs are generally uncorrelated with the Big Five trait dimensions, cognitive complexity, self-esteem, and education (Burnette et al., 2013 ). IPTs have previously been linked to self-regulatory processes such as social comparison, selective information attention, goal setting, and overcoming stereotype threat (Aronson et al., 2002 ; Mangels, Butterfield, Lamb, Good, & Dweck, 2006 ; Nussbaum & Dweck, 2008 ; Robins & Pals, 2002 ). In the sport domain, a fixed mindset of ability has been associated with self-reported amotivation, increased levels of anxiety, reduced levels of satisfaction, more acceptance of cheating behavior that was partly mediated by approach, and avoidance-performance goal orientation. On the other hand, a growth mindset predicts positively enjoyment, satisfaction, and reduced acceptance of cheating behavior through perceptions of approach and avoidance-mastery goal orientation (Biddle et al., 2003 ; Corrion et al., 2010 ; Ommundsen, 2001c ).

Based on an experimental design, Cury, Da Fonséca, Zahn, and Elliot ( 2008 ) found that a fixed mindset has a detrimental influence on performance. Specifically, holding a fixed mindset facilitated concerns about the implications of failure. Such worry further led to decreased practice that directly undermined performance. This finding aligns with several other studies suggesting that individuals with a growth mindset perform better on various tasks (e.g., Aronson et al., 2002 ; Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007 ; Mangels et al., 2006 ; Moser, Schroder, Heeter, Moran, & Lee, 2011 ; Paunesku et al., 2015 ).

IPTs and Goal Orientation

According to Dweck ( 1986 , 1999 ), individuals have different goals in achievement situations, and these goals have their basis in the individuals’ IPTs. Dweck’s approach to goal orientations may be referred to as a person-oriented approach, where personality plays a major role in goal adoption (Maehr & Zusho, 2009 ). Specifically, Dweck and Leggett ( 1988 ) argue that goal orientations have their basis in the individuals’ IPTs, although they may be responsive to change (e.g., Aronson et al., 2002 ; Paunesku et al., 2015 ; Spray et al., 2006 ).

The goals, which Dweck terms either performance or mastery goals, that individuals adopt help create mastery-oriented or helpless responses (Dweck, 1999 ). Individuals with a growth mindset view their ability as something they can improve over time and are thus more likely to adopt mastery goals (Dweck, 1999 ; Dweck & Leggett, 1988 ; Payne, Youngcourt, & Beaubien, 2007 ). Conversely, individuals with a fixed mindset are more likely to endorse performance goals (ability judgments), which creates vulnerability to a helpless pattern of behavior, particularly when their perceived ability is low (Dweck & Leggett, 1988 ; Maehr & Zusho, 2009 ). When helpless, individuals may attribute their failures to personal inadequacy, deficient abilities, or intelligence, and they experience negative affect (Dweck, 1999 ; Dweck & Leggett, 1988 ). Given that mastery goals concern mastery of new things, such as a new technical skill in ski jumping, growth mindset individuals respond to difficult problem solving with a clear mastery-oriented pattern (Elliott & Dweck, 1988 ). This was evident even when facing failure, where individuals managed to continue their focus on the task and how to solve it.

Fixed mindset individuals show a clear helpless pattern in response to difficult problem solving, especially when failing. In sport and physical education research, similar empirical evidence has emerged where a fixed mindset predicts performance goals while a growth mindset predicts mastery goals (e.g., Biddle, Seos, & Chatzisarantis, 1999 ; Biddle et al., 2003 ; Cury, Da Fonséca, Rufo, & Sarrazin, 2002 ; Ommundsen, 2001a , 2001b ; Spray et al., 2006 ). A meta-analysis of the goal orientation nomological net also found support for Dweck’s ( 1986 , 1999 ) predictions that a fixed mindset is negatively correlated with a mastery orientation and positively correlated with performance orientation (Payne et al., 2007 ). However the effect sizes were very small, indicating limited evidence for Dweck’s ( 1986 ) propositions of IPTs being the primary underlying antecedents of goal orientations.

However, a more recent meta-analysis (Burnette et al., 2013 ) including 28,217 respondents from various achievement domains (68% academic), representing 10 different nations covered in 113 different studies, investigated the relationship between IPTs and self-regulation. The results revealed that IPTs predicted distinct self-regulatory processes (performance and mastery orientation, helpless and mastery strategies, negative emotions, and expectations), which in turn predicted goal achievement. The results indicated that a growth mindset significantly and negatively predicted performance orientation, positively predicted mastery orientation, negatively predicted helpless strategies, positively predicted mastery-oriented strategies, negatively predicted negative emotions, and positively predicted expectations. The effects on goal orientation and helpless/mastery strategies were even stronger in the absence versus presence of ego threats such as failure feedback (Burnette et al., 2013 ). These findings lend additional support for Dweck’s initial propositions that IPTs are important predictors of individual goal orientation.

The Re-Introduction of Approach and Avoid Goals

A provocative theory challenging AGT has emerged from work on the hierarchical model of achievement motivation (e.g., Elliot, 1999 ; Elliot & Conroy, 2005 ). The hierarchical model claims to revise and extend AGT. The theory is based on the premise that approach and avoidance motivation are also important in considering achievement striving. Briefly, the hierarchical model of achievement motivation asserts that the dynamic states of involvement are influenced by both the definition of competence and the valence of the goals.

The arguments are similar to arguments made within Need Achievement Theory and research relative to approach success and avoid failure dispositions (e.g., Atkinson & Feather, 1966 ). Contemporary researchers suggest that an approach and an avoid motivation exist (e.g., Elliot, 1997 ; Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996 ; Middleton & Midgley, 1997 ; Skaalvik, 1997 ) and that individuals strive to be competent (an appetitive or approach valence) or strive to avoid appearing incompetent (an aversive or avoid valence). Thus, it is possible to differentiate goals based on their valence or the degree to which the focal outcome is pleasant or unpleasant.

In reviewing the achievement goal literature, Elliot ( 1994 ) observed that performance goals that focus on the pleasant possibility of demonstrating competence (approach goals) lead to different outcomes than performance goals focused on the unpleasant possibility of demonstrating incompetence (avoidance goals). Performance-avoidance goals reduce both free-choice behavior and self-reported interest in a task, whereas performance-approach goals did not have any consistent effect on intrinsic motivation indices (Rawsthorne & Elliot, 1999 ). This finding led to the introduction of a tripartite model of achievement goals comprising mastery, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance goals (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996 ). Following a series of studies by Cury and colleagues (e.g., Cury, Elliot, Sarrazin, Da Fonséca, & Rufo, 2002 ; Cury et al., 2002 ; Cury, Da Fonséca, et al., 2003 ), the model expanded to include a fourth possible achievement goal: mastery-avoidance goal (e.g., Elliot & Conroy, 2005 ). Thus, the argument was proffered that achievement goals should consider both the definition of competence and the valence of the striving . The model now became 2 by 2 with two definitions of competence (mastery vs. performance) and two valences of striving (approaching competence vs. avoiding incompetence) (see Papaioannou, Ziurbanos, Krommidas & Ampatatzoglou, 2012 ; Roberts et al., 2007 ).

The introduction of the hierarchical model has challenged many of the tenets and underlying assumptions of traditional AGT. In particular, it expanded the mastery and performance dichotomy to expand the theory from two goals to four goals. A body of evidence has accumulated to support these assertions, and some argue that the new model is a “better” theory to explain motivated behavior (e.g., Elliot & Conroy, 2005 ). However, the extension is criticized in that it violates some of the basic tenets of AGT (e.g., it negates the orthogonality of orientations) and adds little conceptual understanding to the motivational equation (e.g., Maehr & Zusho, 2009 ; Roberts, 2012 ) and undermines the parsimony and elegance of AGT.

It is not the only source of criticism of the traditional model, or the only expansion of the number of goals. AGT has had strong criticism from Harwood and colleagues (e.g., Harwood, Hardy, & Swain, 2000 ; Harwood & Hardy, 2001 ; Harwood et al., 2008 ) who raise what they term as conceptual and methodological issues. Others have argued for multiple goals, such as process, performance, and outcome goals (e.g., Burton & Weiss, 2008 ; Gould, 2010 ; Hardy, Jones, & Gould, 1996 ; Kingston & Wilson, 2009 ). Harwood and colleagues also argue for multiple states of task involvement and multiple goals (e.g., Harwood et al., 2008 ). Initially, Harwood and colleagues argued that achievement goal theory was not as useful in sport as in education, and they argued that task involvement, as a state, did not exist in sport because of the ego-involving nature of the sport experience: The goal pertinent to sport was termed “self-referenced ego involvement” (Harwood et al., 2000 , p. 244). They proposed that there were three states of involvement that were termed task involvement, self-referenced ego involvement, and norm-referenced ego involvement. This argument was strongly rebutted by Treasure and colleagues (Treasure et al., 2001 ) where the conceptual logic behind the multiple states of involvement was seriously questioned. However, it is for the reader to read the articles and decide for himself or herself.

The above documents the various approaches to arguing for the emergence of goal orientations within AGT. However, the approaches all agree that a personal theory of motivation, an implicit theory, or valence determine the goal orientation (task or ego, mastery or performance) of the individual. The orientation, in turn, determines the state of involvement (task or ego) of the individual.

The Motivational Climate: Mastery and Performance Criteria

One of the most powerful aspects of AGT is that it incorporates not only the individual difference variables of task and ego orientations, growth and entity orientations, but also the situational determinants of task and ego involvement. The situation plays a central role in the motivation process (Ames, 1992a , 1992b , 1992c ; Nicholls, 1984 , 1989 ). Consistent with other motivation research that has emphasized the situational determinants of behavior (e.g., Ames, 1984 ; deCharms, 1976 , 1984 ; Dweck, 2006 ), research within AGT has examined how the structure of the environment can make it more or less likely that an individual will become task or ego involved. The premise of this line of research is that the individual perceives the degree to which task and ego criteria are salient within the context. Through their perception of the criteria inherent in the context and the behaviors necessary to achieve success and/or avoid failure, this affects the achievement behaviors, cognition, and affective responses of individuals (Ames, 1992b ; Roberts, Treasure, & Conroy, 2007 ; Roberts, Treasure, & Kavussanu, 1997 ). When we refer to the achievement cues within the context, the schemas emerging from achievement situations, we will be consistent with Ames and refer to the task-involving aspect of the context as mastery criteria and the ego-involving aspect of the context as performance criteria.

The premise of the research from a situational perspective is that the nature of an individual’s experiences and how he/she interprets these experiences influence the degree to which a mastery and/or a performance set of criteria to achieve success is perceived as salient. A performance climate is created when the criteria of success and failure are other referenced and ego involving (Ames, 1992b ), and the athlete perceives that the demonstration of normative ability is valued. A mastery climate is created when the criteria of success and failure are self-referenced and task involving (Ames, 1992b ), and the athlete perceives that the demonstration of mastery and learning are valued. This is assumed to affect an individual’s interpretation of the criteria of success and failure extant in the context and to affect achievement behavior. The individual will adopt adaptive achievement strategies (namely, to work hard, seek challenging tasks, persist in the face of difficulty) in the climate in which he or she feels comfortable. For most people, and especially children, this is in the climate that emphasizes mastery (e.g., Biddle, 2001 ; Roberts, Treasure, & Conroy, 2007 ; Roberts, Treasure, & Kavussanu, 1997 ; Treasure, 1997 , 2001 ). In mastery-oriented situations, an individual is assumed to adopt adaptive achievement strategies such as working hard, seeking challenging tasks, and persisting in the face of difficulty (Harwood et al., 2015 ; Roberts, 2012 ). Certainly, the extant research supports that assumption (e.g., Treasure, 2001 ). However, we must not forget that some people function well in a performance climate. These are people who are high in perceived competence at the activity and who wish to demonstrate their competence and enjoy demonstrating superiority to others. As long as the perception of high ability lasts, these people seek challenging tasks and revel in demonstrating their ability. But as soon as the perception of ability wavers, because of age, injury, or an individual enters into a more elite context, then these people are likely to adopt maladaptive achievement strategies (namely, to seek easy tasks, reduce effort, or give up in the face of difficulty).

The extant literature in sport suggests that the creation of a mastery motivational climate is likely to be important in optimizing positive (i.e., well-being, sportsmanship, persistence, task perseverance, adaptive achievement strategies) and attenuating negative (i.e., overtraining, self-handicapping, stress responses, burning-out, cheating) attributes (e.g., Fry & Gano-Overway, 2010 ; Iwasaki & Fry, 2016 ; Kuczka & Treasure, 2005 ; Miller et al., 2004 ; Ommundsen & Roberts, 1999 ; Sarrazin, Roberts, Cury, Biddle, & Famose, 2002 ; Standage, Duda, & Ntoumanis, 2003 ; Standage, Treasure, Hooper, & Kuczka, 2007 ; Treasure & Roberts, 2001 ; Wilhelmsen, Sorensen, & Seippel, in press ). This pattern of findings has been confirmed in a comprehensive qualitative and quantitative review using 104 studies (n=34,156) that found that perceptions of a mastery climate were associated with adaptive motivational outcomes including perceived competence, self-esteem, objective performance improvement, intrinsic motivation, positive affective states, experienced flow, and were less likely to cheat (Harwood et al., 2015 ). Conversely, perceptions of a performance climate were associated with extrinsic motivation, negative affective states, maladaptive performance strategies, perfectionism, and likelihood to cheat. The extant evidence, therefore, supports the position that perceptions of a mastery motivational climate are associated with more adaptive motivational and affective response patterns than perceptions of a performance climate in the context of sport engagement.

For the purposes of the present discussion, it is well to realize that dispositional goal orientations and perceptions of the climate are two independent dimensions of motivation within AGT that interact to affect behavior (Nicholls, 1989 ). But the powerful and parsimonious aspect of AGT is that both the individual dispositions and the perception of the motivational climate are encompassed by the theory. It is true that research to date primarily deals with dispositional goal orientations and perceptions of the motivational climate as separate constructs in isolation to each other (e.g., Harwood et al., 2015 ; Lochbaum et al., 2016 ). It has been suggested that an interactionist approach that looks to combine both variables promises to provide a more complete understanding of achievement behaviors in the sport and physical education experience (e.g., Duda, Chi, Newton, Walling, & Catley, 1995 ; Papaioannou, 1994 ; Roberts, 1992 , 2012 ; Roberts & Treasure, 1992 ; Roberts et al., 2007 ; Roberts, Treasure, & Kavussanu, 1997 ; Treasure, 2001 ).

In a qualitative review, Roberts ( 2012 ) argued that instead of looking at achievement goals and the motivational climate separately, as is the custom, AGT should focus on an integrated perspective because dispositional goal orientations and the perceived motivational climate are part of the same theoretical platform and that the energizing force for motivated behavior is the resultant state of involvement. It supports meaningful relationships between personal goals of achievement and/or the perceived criteria of success and failure in the motivational climate with cognitive and affective beliefs about involvement in physical activity, as well as achievement striving.

However, there are few studies that have investigated the interactive effect of both the goal orientations and the motivational climate within the same study. One exception is a recent study investigating the perceived physical and pedagogical inclusion of disabled students in physical education. Wilhelmsen and colleagues ( in press ) found that to feel socially and physically included it is important to have a high mastery climate and a low performance climate. In addition, the children felt more social and pedagogical inclusion when high in task and ego orientation, or high in task orientation, but only when in a mastery climate. Another exception is a study conducted by Cury and colleagues (Cury, Biddle, Famose, Goudas, Sarrazin & Durand, 1996 ). In this study, the researchers utilized structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine the interest of adolescent girls in physical education. The researchers conclude by suggesting that their findings support the positive effects of a mastery-oriented motivational climate in physical education and offer evidence of a possible shaping effect of the climate on an individual’s goal orientation. This has been supported in more recent studies (e.g., Iwasaki & Fry, 2016 ).

SEM and multilevel SEM may be appropriate techniques to examine potential relationships among achievement goals and perceptions of the motivational climate, including the testing of interactive effects (e.g., Preacher, Zyphur, & Zhang, 2016 ). Particularly the multilevel SEM approach may provide some interesting insights into how goal orientations and the motivational climate may interplay by simultaneously accounting for the individual and group level of analysis (cf. Lam, Ruzek, Schenke, Conley, & Karabenick, 2015 ).

Research has found interesting relationships between orientations and the climate (e.g., Swain & Harwood, 1996 ; Treasure & Roberts, 1998 ; Wilhelmsen et al., in press ), but some research has failed to find the hypothesized effects (e.g., Harwood & Swain, 1998 ). Although moderated hierarchical analysis does enable researchers to examine the separate, as well as the interactive effects of goal orientations and the motivational climate, this type of analysis is not powerful. However, the fact that significant main effects emerged for both climate and orientations appears to confirm the veracity of investigating the effects of goal orientations and perceptions of the motivational climate that the majority of achievement goal research has taken to date. Even though some have discussed the implications of both goal orientations and the motivational climate within a model (e.g., Roberts, 1992 ; Treasure, 2001 ), we have to agree with Harwood and colleagues ( 2008 ) that research in sport has not yet fully examined the interaction of dispositions and the situational criteria of the motivational climate on the manifestation of goal involvement.

Conclusions From AGT Research

There are two important conclusions we may draw from the evidence of the research effort on AGT over the past 40 years. The first one is that ego involving and IPT focusing on entity goals are more likely to lead to maladaptive achievement behavior, especially when participants perceive competence to be low, are concerned with failure, or invested in protecting self-worth. In such circumstances, the evidence is quite clear: Motivation ebbs, task investment is low, persistence is low, performance suffers, satisfaction and enjoyment are lower, peer relationships suffer, cheating is more likely, burnout is more likely, and participants feel more negatively about themselves and the achievement context. But as we have been at pains to note, this does not mean that ego-involving goals are always negative; in some situations and for some people they are positive. When one is ego oriented with a high perception of competence, then that goal is facilitative of achievement and functions as a motivating construct (e.g., Pensgaard & Roberts, 2002 ). This is precisely why being ego involved in sport can be very motivating and lead to sustained achievement behavior. But even then, ego-involving goals are more “fragile” and can lead to maladaptive achievement striving as context information is processed (Dweck & Leggett, 1988 ) such as when age begins to become a factor in elite sport performance or when injury strikes.

Second, the research is unequivocal that task involving (mastery) and IPT focusing on growth goals are adaptive. When task involved, whether through personal dispositions or participants perceive mastery criteria in the context, or both, then motivation is optimized, participants are invested in the task, persist longer, performance is higher, satisfaction and enjoyment are higher, peer relationships are fostered, burnout and cheating are less likely, and participants feel more positively about themselves and the task. Being task involved has been consistently associated with desirable cognitive-, affective-, and achievement-striving responses. The research is clear that if we wish to optimize motivation in sport and physical activity, we ought to promote task involvement. It does not matter whether we do it through enhancing socialization experiences so that the individual has a task-goal orientation and is naturally task involved (Nicholls, 1989 ) or we structure the physical activity context to be more task involving (Ames, 1992a ; Treasure & Roberts, 1995 , 2001 ). The crucial issue is that the participant has task-involving goals of achievement. The evidence has led many sport psychologists to conclude that being task involved better enables participants to manage motivation in the sport experience (e.g., Brunel, 2000 ; Duda & Hall, 2001 ; Iwasaki & Fry, 2016 ; Hall & Kerr, 1997 ; Pensgaard & Roberts, 2002 ; Roberts, 2001 , 2012 ; Roberts, Treasure, & Conroy, 2007 ; Roberts, Treasure, & Kavussanu, 1997 ; Theeboom, de Knop, & Weiss, 1995 ; Treasure & Roberts, 1995 ).

Now let us discuss Self-Determination Theory and its principal advocates.

Self-Determination Theory and Research

A central element of Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985 ) is the concept of psychological needs. Basic Psychological Needs Theory (BPNT; Deci & Ryan, 2000 ) is one of five mini-theories that constitute the meta-theory of SDT. Within BPNT, Deci and Ryan proposed that individuals have innate and fundamental psychological needs that individuals seek to satisfy in order to achieve psychological adjustment, internalization, well-being, and personal growth. However, a dialectic occurs between the active organism and the social-contextual conditions that constitute the basis for the theory’s predictions about behavior, experience, and development processes. They propose that individuals will develop and function most effectively when their immediate psychosocial environment provides support for their basic psychological needs.

Three basic psychological needs have been identified, namely, the need for autonomy, the need for competence, and the need for relatedness. The need for autonomy refers to the perception that one is an “origin” of his or her own actions (Milyavskaya et al., 2009 ). The need for competence is associated with the perception of experiencing mastery and efficiency in a given environment and social context (Deci & Ryan, 1991 ). The need for relatedness is linked to the perception of experiencing meaningful interactions to significant others in a given context (Milyavskaya et al., 2009 ). Frustration of these needs is believed to have a negative impact on the individual’s psychological development, integrity, and well-being. Self-protective accommodations may be developed by individuals experiencing basic psychological needs thwarting to cope with the associated psychological deficit (Ryan, Sheldon, Kasser, & Deci, 1996 ). While these adjustments may provide some compensating satisfaction, these strategies ultimately fail to satisfy the thwarted basic needs, potentially leading to serious psychological maladjustments or pathologies (Froreich, Vartanian, Zawadzki, Grisham, & Touyz, 2017 ; Thogersen-Ntoumani, Ntoumanis, & Nikitaras, 2010 ).

SDT (Deci & Ryan, 1985 , 2000 ) stipulates that individuals in achievement settings will adopt a more or less self-determined motivational style because of the perceived level of satisfaction and fulfillment of the three basic psychological needs. When all three needs are satisfied within an activity, individuals will feel a high degree of autonomous and self-determined motivation. In different sport and achievement contexts, numerous studies have linked high autonomous motivation to active information seeking, higher levels of performance, task perseverance, goal attainment, and increased well-being (Amabile, Goldfarb, & Brackfield, 1990 ; Van den Broeck, Ferris, Chang, & Rosen, 2016 ; Koestner & Losier, 2002 ). However, lower levels of perceived autonomy have been linked to ineffective goal striving; impaired performance and persistence; increased feelings of stress, anxiety, self-criticism; vulnerability to persuasion, as well as exhaustion and burnout (Van den Broeck et al., 2016 ; Gagné & Forest, 2008 ; Koestner & Losier, 2002 ; Treasure, Lemyre, Kuczka, & Standage, 2007 ). Needs thwarting, defined as the intentional obstruction of the needs (Bartholomew, Ntoumanis, Ryan, & Thøgersen-Ntoumani, 2011 ; Vansteenkiste & Ryan, 2013 ), has been reported to be more detrimental than experiencing low levels of need satisfaction. It is linked to higher reported levels of ill-being and exhaustion in a performance context (Bentzen, Lemyre, & Kenttä, 2016a ). SDT also describes how different perceptions of a performance environment can either promote or undermine well-being (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ). An autonomy-supportive environment is characterized by an understanding and acknowledgment of one’s perspectives and provides a meaningful rationale for arduous tasks, offering opportunities for personal solutions and minimizing performance pressure (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ; Ryan & Deci, 2002 ). On the other hand, a controlling environment will typically put normative constraints on how one is expected to behave in a given environment, imposing predetermined goals, setting up a variety of restraints, imposing contingent pressure and rewards, and often expecting performance levels beyond reason (Deci & Ryan, 2000 , Gagné & Deci, 2005 ). An autonomy-supportive environment believed to promote basic psychological needs satisfaction while controlling environment will likely challenge the satisfaction of those needs and thwart the process to achieve a healthy balance (Ryan & Deci, 2002 ).

From an SDT perspective, individuals can be motivated for different reasons (Deci & Ryan, 1985 ; Ryan & Deci, 2000 ). These different reasons for being involved in an activity are typically placed on a continuum of autonomy ranging from high to low self-determination. The assumption is that it is the perceived incentive for the initiation of a behavior that influences subsequent levels of motivation. The most autonomous motivation regulation is labeled intrinsic motivation. An activity is intrinsically motivated and autonomous when it is freely experienced and self-endorsed. Intrinsic motivation emanates from the target behavior itself with the locus of causality being perceived as internal. However, some actions can be motivated by external sources of regulations that are not necessarily endorsed by the self. In this case people do not feel as autonomous, perceiving an external locus of causality (deCharms, 1968 ). Behaviors are perceived as being extrinsically motivated when individuals perform an activity because they value its associated outcomes more than the activity itself. SDT (Deci & Ryan, 1985 , 2008 ) contends that there is a continuum of extrinsic motivation, with each type of motivation differing as a function of the level of self-determination. The first extrinsic regulation is termed integrated regulation. Executed volitionally, integrated extrinsically motivated behaviors differ from intrinsically motivated actions in that they are aimed at obtaining personally important outcomes. The next extrinsic regulation on the continuum is identified regulation, corresponding to when the individual decides to participate in a task judged important for him/herself though not really interesting, such as exercising only for health benefits. The following regulation is termed introjected whereby behavior is fueled by inner pressures, such as guilt, to perform when the individual is not intrinsically interested but feels he/she ought to participate in the activity. The fourth extrinsic regulation is labeled external and represents extrinsic motivation as it was originally defined in the literature, for example, behavior controlled by specific external factors (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ). An externally regulated individual typically engages in the behavior to obtain something (e.g., an award) or to avoid a negative consequence (e.g., punishment). Finally, individuals can also behave in some contexts without any motivational reasons for participating in the activity. This construct is termed amotivation and it results from not valuing an activity (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ). Motivated individuals lack intention to participate in a given activity, and they do not perceive contingencies between their behavior and achievement outcomes. They are entirely lacking any form of self-determination, they have no relationship to any achievement goal, and their somewhat automatized behavior is solely controlled by the environment.

The different motivational regulations can thus be differentiated on a motivational continuum based on their relative autonomy, reflecting the level of self-determination within each regulation (Ryan & Connell, 1989 ). Intrinsic motivation is purely self-determined as it is defined through being involved in an activity for its own sake, because it is interesting and satisfying (Ryan, 1995 ). There are two extrinsically motivated forms of regulations that are also autonomous: namely, integrated and identified (Ryan & Deci, 2000 ). Integrated regulation is seen as is wholly autonomous as it reflects a behavior that is close to one’s own values and identity, while it is not necessarily interesting. Identified regulation is an autonomous form of motivational regulation as it reflects to what degree an athlete values sport participation. On the motivational continuum, these three autonomous regulations are followed by three less self-determined forms of motivation. Two of them are often seen as controlled motivational regulations, namely, introjected and extrinsic regulations. Introjected regulation refers to an athlete acting to avoid guilt and shame or to attain ego enhancements, such as pride (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ). External regulation is the least self-determined form of motivation on the continuum as it is characterized by behaviors conducted to satisfy external demands or to reward contingency (Chemolli & Gagné, 2014 ). Amotivation has been interpreted as a separate construct, outside of the continuum.

In an attempt to simplify these concepts and for the sake of parsimony, motivational regulations have often been collapsed into two types, based on whether they refer to more autonomous (intrinsic and identified) or more controlled (introjected and external) forms of motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2008 ; Williams, Gagné, Ryan, & Deci, 2002 ). While autonomous motivation refers to athletes feeling self-determined and involved because their sport is personally important or interesting (Williams et al., 2002 ), controlled motivation refers to behaviors of athletes feeling pressured or coerced by internal or external sources (Ryan & Deci, 2000 ). Research clearly indicates that these two dimensions of motivation lead to very different outcomes in performance settings (Deci & Ryan, 2008 ).

In an attempt to further simplify the use and the interpretation of the theoretical framework, some researchers have used a single score Self-Determination Index (SDI; e.g., Frenet, Guay, & Senecal, 2004 ; Vallerand, Fortier, & Guay, 1997 ; Vallerand, & Rousseau, 2001 ). The SDI has typically been computed using this formula: [(2*(IM knowledge + IM accomplishment + IM stimulation)/3 + 1*Identified Regulation]−[(1*Introjected Regulation + 1*External Regulation)/2 + 2*Amotivation]. The advantage to using such an approach is that it allows for a simplification of the interpretation of an individual’s quality of motivation where the higher the positive index score, the more self-determined the motivation. Some researchers (e.g., Lemyre, Treasure, & Roberts, 2006 ) have demonstrated that it can be a useful methodology when investigating shifts in motivation over time. Lemyre and colleagues have also reported that this approach has important limitations as it collapses regulations with potentially very different effects on how individuals interpret the reasons for participating in different activities. Additionally, incorporating the amotivation subscale to the SDI may seem counterintuitive as it refers to the absence of regulation and should perhaps be interpreted independently from the continuum. In order to truly grasp the influence of each type of regulations and their potential interaction, Chemolli and Gagné ( 2014 ) argued that the quality of motivation should be measured with separate regulation scores rather than a sum score of regulations, as each motivational regulation should be seen as a temperature scale on its own. Recent studies investigating changes in quality of motivation over time have adopted this approach with advanced statistical analyses.

Research Evidence

SDT states that intrinsic motivation and more self-determined forms of extrinsic motivation (identified, integrated regulations) are associated with adaptive emotional, cognitive, and behavioral consequences. The non-self-determined forms of motivation (introjected and extrinsic regulations) and amotivation have been associated with a variety of maladaptive participation outcomes in different performance settings (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ). Even though some researchers (e.g., Martinent & Decret, 2015 ) have clearly argued that higher levels of self-determined forms of motivation generally increase chances to succeed and reach the elite level in sports, Vallerand and colleagues ( 2008 ) have suggested that a combination of different motivational regulations (self-determined and controlled) may be optimal in achieving high levels of performance depending on the context and the time frame. That is, the quality of motivation of participants in sports and other performance contexts will often reflect a motivational profile based on a combination of self-determined and controlled forms of motivation, also leading to positive outcomes. Hypothetically, the presence of certain self-determined reasons for engaging in activity may neutralize the negative influence of other controlled reasons for participation, while the presence of these regulations may significantly add to the motivation and the determination of an athlete.

In a study by DiBartolo, Frost, Chang, LaSota, and Grills ( 2004 ), the authors state that individuals in a performance context pursuing challenging goals and high, personal standards may experience different levels of self-determined motivation because of perceiving these goals and standards of performance as a challenge or a required level of performance necessary to attain or to maintain self-worth. The assumption is that intrinsic motivation translates well in a challenge-seeking state, as the athlete is able to maintain intrinsic interest for the activity. In contrast, if those high, personal standards are in order to maintain or attain a sense of self-worth, it may hinder self-determined behavior. Autonomous and self-determined motivation is expected to lead to more adaptive coping skills accompanied by more flexible and positive stress appraisals (Mouratidis & Michou, 2011 ). When motivation is not self-determined and the athlete’s behavior is externally regulated, the athlete will perceive less control, which may lead to maladaptive achievement outcomes such as performance impairment, physical, and emotional exhaustion, which are all symptoms of burnout (Lemyre et al., 2007 ). Research in this area has suggested that athlete burnout is a result of a negative shift toward a less self-determined quality of motivation and a continuous experience of stress. This is due to personal factors such as maladaptive forms of passion and perfectionism or situational factors such as parental pressure or physical overtraining (Gould, 1996 ; Lemyre et al., 2007 ; Lemyre, Treasure, & Roberts, 2006 ). Athletes who suffer from burnout will typically show signs of demotivation because of the reduced sense of accomplishment and devaluation of the sport experience in general (Lemyre et al., 2007 ). Burnout seems to share many commonalities with amotivation. Amotivation reflects a state where an athlete who was originally showing great motivation for an activity experienced a gradual deterioration of the quality of his or her motivation over time, often in the face of adversity and an inability to achieve important goals. The athlete ends up by feeling that there is no relationship between the investment in the activity and the return for this investment (Lemyre et al., 2006 ). These findings support the use of Self-Determination Theory to understand better the factors leading to maladaptive achievement outcomes in sports such as burnout. In addition, Quested and Duda ( 2011 ) found that promoting autonomous motivation is relevant to reduce the risk of burnout in vocational dancers.

In a series of articles investigating psychological adjustment, well-being, and prevention of exhaustion in elite sport coaches, Bentzen and colleagues (Bentzen, Lemyre, & Kenttä, 2014 , 2016a , 2016b ) used an SDT framework to better understand the complex challenges associated with performing in a position of leadership in sports. In one of their articles (Bentzen et al., 2016a ), the authors used the SDT-process model (Ryan, Patrick, Deci, & Williams, 2008 ) to highlight how personal and environmental variables interact. While SDT assumes that people have natural developmental tendencies for growth, experiencing mastery, and integrating new experiences into a coherent sense (Ryan & Deci, 2002 ), the SDT-process model presents a framework explaining how these tendencies are fueled and supported in the interaction with the social environment (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ). The process from the individual interacting with the environment to outcomes is described as the SDT-process model (Ryan et al., 2008 ). The proposed sequential development model has four important components where (1) the perceived environment predicts, (2) psychological need satisfaction predicts, (3) the quality of motivation finally predicting, (4) and outcomes (Bentzen et al., 2016a ; Fortier, Sweet, O’Sullivan, & Williams, 2007 ; Halvari, Halvari, Bjørnebekk, & Deci, 2013 ; Williams, McGregor, Zeldman, Freedman, & Deci, 2004 ). Following this framework, Bentzen and colleagues ( 2016a ) investigated changes in motivation indices relative to burnout symptoms in high-performance coaches over the course of a sport season. The authors found that lower levels of need satisfaction in coaches as well as the experience of having their needs thwarted led to maladaptive outcomes. They also found that high levels of autonomous motivation had a preventive effect on the development of exhaustion in elite-level coaches. Their research underlined the importance of a performance environment promoting the development and maintenance of autonomous motivation in individuals to ensure performance and well-being, as well as preventing exhaustion.

Similarities and Differences Between AGT and SDT

As is clear to the reader from the preceding, there are some remarkable similarities in the cognitive, behavioral, and emotional outcomes predicted by SDT and AGT. In both theories, participants become invested in the task, persist longer, performance is higher, satisfaction and enjoyment are higher, peer relationships are fostered, well-being is enhanced, and participants feel more positively about themselves and the task when motivation is task involving and/or self-determined. Being task involved and self-determined have been consistently associated with desirable cognitive-, affective-, and achievement-striving responses. The research is now clear that if we wish to optimize motivation in sport and performing contexts, we ought to promote task involvement and/or autonomous forms of motivation. It does not matter whether we do it through enhancing socialization experiences so that we encourage the individual to be task involved or autonomous or the person is naturally task involved through their disposition to be task oriented (AGT) or to satisfy basic needs (SDT).

However, the theories do have some basic differences. First, and most obvious, AGT and SDT differ in the energization of achievement behavior. SDT argues that the person is motivated to satisfy the basic needs of competence, relatedness, and autonomy. It is striving to satisfy these basic needs that stoke the motivational engine. In terms of “nature versus nature,” SDT assumes that nature is the major underlying energization of motivated behavior, and there are universal basic needs that every person has and seeks to satisfy, even though a dialectic occurs between the context and the individual. Conversely, AGT argues that we are motivated to achieve because we wish to demonstrate competence: to others and ourselves. We learn through our socialization experiences that the demonstration of competence is a valued attribute in society. There is a long history in psychology of how individuals are socialized to recognize that the demonstration of competence is a valued social attribute (e.g., Roberts & Sutton Smith, 1962 ). AGT assumes that the demonstration of competence is a learned attribute; therefore, it is nurtured by socialization processes. Thus, whether we choose SDT or AGT, it becomes an issue of how one believes the psyche functions: Do we have basic needs that drive the human organism, or is the human organism intentional and rational and makes decisions based on how one thinks things work in achievement settings? One’s choice of theory may simply come down to that basic question.

A second major difference in the two theories is in terms of scope. SDT purports to be a meta “theory of everything,” which is concerned with the global nature of human beings (Deci & Ryan, 2012 ). SDT is a meta-theory with five mini-theories within it, with Basic Needs Theory being the motivational “engine” that drives the theory. SDT argues that all people need to experience the basic psychological nutrients of competence, relatedness, and autonomy for effective functioning, psychological health, well-being, and the development of personality and cognitive structures. The degree to which the three basic needs are satisfied or thwarted has positive and negative influence on a wide range of outcomes, including motivation. AGT, on the other hand, is a more restricted theory dealing with achievement-motivated behavior in pursuit of a specified goal that is valued and meaningful to the individual. When one is trying to demonstrate ability in a valued context to self and/or others, then AGT is a parsimonious and elegant theory to describe and explain the social cognitive dynamics of pursuing an achievement goal or outcome (Maehr & Zusho, 2009 ), which is why it lends itself to competitive sport and performance so well.

A third difference is in the arguments pertaining to the relevance of the social context to affect achievement behavior. Both SDT and AGT emphasize the importance of the social environment (AGT: Mastery, Performance; SDT: Autonomy support, Controlling), but there are substantive differences. According to SDT, social factors influence human motivation through the mediating variables of autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Vallerand, 1997 ). On the other hand, AGT focuses on how perceptions of the extant criteria of success and failure that create either a mastery or a performance climate, which in turn interacts with dispositional goals to influence affect, behavior, and cognition in achievement contexts (Ntoumanis, 2001 ). Still, there is a “general convergence of evidence from achievement goal theories and SDT concerning the optimal design of learning environments” (Deci & Ryan, 2000 , p. 260). Specifically, both conceptual frameworks suggest that intrinsic motivation is nurtured in environments that promote self-mastery and choice. On the other hand, intrinsic motivation is thwarted, or supplanted by ego involvement, in environments in which normative comparison operates and rewards are provided contingent on performance.

AGT and SDT also have similarities, and not only in outcome predictions. There are similarities in achievement goals. Achievement goals are relevant to SDT, and researchers have looked at the influence of what is termed goal content (intrinsic vs. extrinsic) on the quality of motivation of individuals in different performance contexts (e.g., Solberg & Halvari, 2009 ). SDT differentiates between intrinsic and extrinsic goal content. Intrinsic goal content is associated to reasons such as learning and personal growth, friendship, and social contribution (Kasser & Ryan, 1996 ). It is assumed to lead to adaptive outcomes. This is very similar to the goal of task involvement in AGT, which is associated with learning, personal growth, and mastery. Extrinsic goal content is associated to reasons such as financial success, status, and physical appearance. Extrinsic goal content increases the risk for an athlete to experience maladaptive participation outcomes (e.g., Solberg & Halvari, 2009 ). This is very similar to the goal of ego involvement in AGT that is associated with status relative to others and the demonstration of normative competence. The conceptual rationale behind the achievement goals is, of course, quite different. In SDT, the assumption is that intrinsic goal content is expected to promote the fulfillment of the three basic needs (Deci & Ryan, 2000 , 2012 ) while extrinsic goals are not instrumental to basic need satisfaction as they lead an individual to focus on external outcomes and social comparison (Kasser & Ryan, 1996 ; Solberg & Halvari, 2009 ). In AGT, because it has a more limited focus on demonstrating a valued social attribute, then the demonstration of competence as one defines competence is expected to influence one’s motivational stance. These concepts in SDT have yet to be exhaustively investigated in the context of sport and performance; however, research has suggested that intrinsic goal content mediated the relationship between sport participation and psychological well-being (Chatzisarantis & Hagger, 2009 ) in a similar way to AGT research findings. In a study of elite athletes, Solberg and Halvari ( 2009 ) found that athletes experiencing autonomy support from their coach were more likely to have autonomous and intrinsic reasons for their goals and reported more positive emotional well-being. This is similar to the research findings with the mastery motivational climate in AGT (e.g., Ames, 1992c ).

All motivation theories over time have a focus on competence, in one form or another. SDT and AGT are no different. SDT’s focus is on the need for competence as a unitary human need that when satisfied will facilitate autonomous motivation (Ntoumanis, 2001 ). SDT has been criticized for not providing a well-articulated and internally consistent conceptualization of the role of competence in maintaining autonomous motivation (Butler, 1987 ). According to Butler, SDT has not sufficiently distinguished between different kinds of competence goals or the relation between the perception of autonomy and different conceptions of ability. It may be argued that SDT has contributed more to the understanding of how social contexts may foster intrinsic motivation by the support of autonomy instead of clarifying how these contexts may contribute to continuing motivation by promoting either one rather than another conception of ability (Butler, 1987 ). This is supported by Spinath and Steinmayr ( 2012 ) who argue also that different aspects of competence are important. For people with competence-demonstration goals, measuring competence relative to others or certain external criteria is important, while for people with competence-development goals, it is important to “measure one’s own competence against intraindividual temporal standards” (p. 1144). The distinction is not captured with measurement of the need for competence. On the other hand, AGT is more concerned with how thoughts and perceptions energize motivated behavior. The focus is on how being task or ego involved influences task difficulty choices and sustained achievement striving. Being “task involved” is important to both theories. Task involvement “bears a considerable relation to intrinsic motivation when applied to the achievement domain” (Deci & Ryan, 2000 , p. 260). When individuals are task involved, their motivation to perform a task derives from intrinsic properties and not from the expected outcomes of the task. When intrinsically motivated, people do an activity because the behavior in itself is interesting as well as spontaneously satisfying. When individuals are task involved, the intrinsic motivation system is involved in initiating, sustaining, and rewarding a specific behavior or activity (Deci & Ryan, 2000 ). Being task involved indicates that the individual strives for mastery, while being intrinsically motivated makes the mastery a reward in itself. Therefore, task involvement facilitates autonomous behavior as well as the need for competence (Ntoumanis, 2001 ).

Despite the partial convergence of constructs (performance climate/controlling climate; mastery climate/autonomous climate; need for competence, task involvement), and similar outcome predictions, the two theories are based on different theoretical perspectives that may make it inappropriate to combine them (Marsh, Craven, Hinkley, & Debus, 2003 ). However, an attempt has been made: Duda ( 2013 ) proposed a hierarchical reconceptualization of the motivational climate in sport, specifically for children, by combining the two conceptual frameworks. Duda introduced “empowering” and “disempowering” dimensions to coaching behavior to integrate SDT and AGT. When coaches are empowering, they will be autonomy supportive, mastery involving, and support social relatedness. Coaches will promote self-referenced criteria of success when assessing competence and will satisfy basic needs in the participants. When coaches are disempowering, they will be controlling and use performance criteria of success. Coaches will promote other referenced criteria of success when assessing competence and be less concerned with satisfying basic needs. Can the concepts of empowerment and disempowerment integrate SDT and AGT to become a unified theory? A recent study would suggest probably not: Using a Bayesian approach, Solstad and colleagues (in review) failed to confirm the hierarchical nature of the coach-created motivational climate as proposed by Duda. Solstad and colleagues agree with Marsh and colleagues ( 2003 ) who argued that the two theories are based on different conceptual arguments, which make it inappropriate to combine them. The empowerment concepts are proposed to integrate the theories, but in fact they make a descriptive and pragmatic case to use both theories to maximize the likelihood of creating a supportive, task-involving, autonomous-coaching climate for the benefit of the children in the sport experience. Future attempts to create a unified theory need to address developing unique energizing constructs because, at the present time, both theories maintain their own unique energizing mechanisms. However, that does not mean that the children do not benefit from the pragmatic inclusion of both theories as argued cogently by Duda; they clearly do (Solstad, 2016 ).

Conclusions and Future Directions

As we have stated above, in both theories, when motivation is task involving and/or self-determined, participants become invested in the task, persist longer, perform better, satisfaction and enjoyment are higher, peer relationships are fostered, well-being is enhanced, and participants feel more positively about themselves and the task. Being task involved and self-determined have been consistently associated with desirable cognitive-, affective-, and achievement-striving responses. The research is now clear that if we wish to optimize motivation in sport and performing contexts, we should promote task involvement and/or autonomous forms of motivation. Both theories recognize the importance of personal variables and the impact of the perceived context on motivation for sustained achievement behavior.

Which theory should we use? Well, that clearly depends on your understanding of how the psyche works. Do you believe that satisfying basic needs drive the human organism? If so, SDT is for you. Do you believe that the human organism is rational and intentional and is driven by how one perceives the social context or believes in trying to demonstrate either task or ego-involved competence? Then AGT is for you. SDT is a more global theory of personality; AGT is limited to achievement tasks that are valued by the person. It is a choice, but the predictions of both theories are remarkably similar. However, it would seem that trying to integrate the theories is not viable at this time (Marsh et al., 2003 ; Solstad et al., forthcoming ), but that does not mean we should stop trying.

It is interesting to note that a mastery/autonomy-supportive climate has been found to facilitate positive outcomes while a performance/controlling climate is associated with negative outcomes. But these climates may be interdependent and may thus exist simultaneously, certainly within AGT (Ames, 1992a , 1992b , 1992c ). An interesting line of inquiry for future research may be to investigate further the interplay between the opposing climates. To the best of our knowledge, there are only two studies that address this, and then only from an AGT approach (Buch, Nerstad, & Safvenbom, 2017 ; Ommundsen & Roberts, 1999 ). For example, Buch and colleagues found a positive relationship between perceived mastery climate and increased intrinsic motivation only when combined with low levels of perceived performance climate. An important task for future research would be to attempt to clarify what may represent a beneficial balance between mastery (autonomous) and performance (controlling) climates in sport and performance.

Another interesting direction could be to question whether being task involved is beneficial for everyone. There is evidence that being ego involved is beneficial for some individuals in competitive contexts when the individual has a high perception of competence (Pensgaard & Roberts, 2000 ). This research showed also that elite athletes seem to benefit from being high in both task and ego orientations. It may be that individuals who are simply high in task orientation may not function well in a highly competitive environment.

Given that mastery (autonomous) and performance (controlling) climates have such profound influence on achievement behavior, future research should address what may be the crucial antecedents of such climates in sport. This would also inform coaching behaviors. As an example, one study has addressed how leadership style (e.g., Baric & Bucik, 2009 ) may be such a relevant antecedent. Other possible and important antecedents may exist.

Some researchers have questioned whether IPTs can operate at the situational level. Although IPTs have been found to be temporarily changeable (interventions), the fact that IPTs initially are operationalized as relatively stable dispositions may confuse an operationalization at the situational level. Perhaps a better and more theoretically sound approach could be to investigate the predictive value of the perceived motivational climate as operationalized by Nicholls ( 1984 ) and Ames ( 1992c ). Dweck’s approach builds on Nicholls’s ( 1981 ) initial ideas, and thus it would facilitate theoretical coherence to link the IPTs with the perceived motivational climate. One study did test this showing that a performance climate induced a fixed mindset of ability, while a mastery climate generated a growth mindset in physical education students (Ommundsen, 2001c ). This study’s findings are based on cross-sectional data that suggests the need for more rigorous designs and data to support the findings. This could also facilitate an answer to how IPTs are socialized in ongoing interactions in various achievement domains. Specifically, the extant criteria of success and failure signaled through the policies, practices, and procedures in sports, at school or in organizations, may contribute to elicit the different beliefs (Maehr & Braskamp, 1986 ).

We began with the philosophical approach of Nicholls ( 1979 ), and we end with a quote from his 1989 book that pertains to both AGT and SDT equally: “If all students are optimally motivated, we are on the way to the goal of equality in the fulfillment of potential” (Nicholls, 1989 , p. 151). Nicholls was interested in the academic domain, but the same is certainly true in the sport domain.

• Amabile, T. M. , Goldfarb, P. , & Brackfield, S. C. (1990). Social influences on creativity: Evaluation, coaction, and surveillance. Creativity Research Journal , 3 , 6–21.
• Ames, C. (1984). Competitive, co-operative, and individualistic goal structures: A cognitive motivational analysis. In R. E. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 1, pp. 177–207). Gainesville, FL: Academic Press.
• Ames, C. (1992a). Achievement goals and the classroom motivational climate. In D. Schunk & J. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 327–348). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Ames, C. (1992b). Achievement goals, motivational climate, and motivational processes. In G. C. Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 161–176). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Ames, C. (1992c). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology , 84 , 261–271.
• Aronson, J. , Fried, C. B. , & Good, C. (2002). Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 38 , 113–125.
• Atkinson, J. W. , & Feather, N. T. (1966). A theory of achievement motivation . New York, NY: Wiley.
• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Baric, R. , & Bucik, V. (2009). Motivational differences in athletes trained by coaches of different motivational and leadership profiles. Kinesiology , 41 , 181–194.
• Bartholomew, K. J. , Ntoumanis, N. , Ryan, R. M. , & Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C. (2011). Psychological need thwarting in the sport context: Assessing the darker side of athletic experience. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 33 , 75–102.
• Bentzen, M. , Lemyre, P.-N. , & Kenttä, G. (2014). The process of burnout among professional sport coaches through the lens of self-determination theory: A qualitative approach. Sports Coaching Review , 3 , 101–116.
• Bentzen, M. , Lemyre, P.-N. , & Kenttä, G. (2016a). Changes in motivation and burnout indices in high-performance coaches over the course of a competitive season. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology , 28 , 28–48.
• Bentzen, M. , Lemyre, P.-N. , & Kenttä, G. (2016b). Development of exhaustion for high-performance coaches in association with workload and motivation: A person-centered approach. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 22 , 10–19.
• Biddle, S. (2001). Enhancing motivation in physical education. In G. C. Roberts (Ed.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 101–127). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Biddle, S. J. H. , Seos, I. , & Chatzisarantis, N. (1999). Predicting physical activity intentions using a goal perspectives approach: A study of Hungarian youth. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports , 9 , 353–357.
• Biddle, S. J. H. , Wang, J. C. K. , Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. , & Spray, M. C. (2003). Motivation for physical activity in young people: Entity and incremental beliefs concerning athletic ability. Journal of Sports Sciences , 21 , 973–989.
• Blackwell, L. S. , Trzesniewski, K. H. , & Dweck, C. C. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development , 78 (1), 246–263.
• Brunel, P. C. (2000). Achievement motivation: Toward interactive effects of dispositional and situational variables on motivation and social cognition. Habilitation a diriger les researches . Limoges, France: University of Limoges Press.
• Buch, R. , Nerstad, C. G. , & Safvenbom, R. (2017). The interactive roles of mastery climate and performance climate in predicting intrinsic motivation. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports , 27 (2), 245–253.
• Burnette, J. L. , O’Boyle, E. H. , VanEpps, E. M. , Pollack, J. M. , & Finkel, E. J. (2013). Mind-sets matter: A meta-analytic review of implicit theories and self-regulation. Psychological Bulletin , 139 (3), 655–701.
• Burton, D. , & Weiss, C. L. (2008). The fundamental goal concept: The path to process and performance success. In T. Horn (Ed.), Advances in sport psychology (3rd ed., pp. 339–375). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving and ego-involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology , 79 (4), 474–482.
• Chamberlin, J. M. , Fry, M. D. , & Iwasaki, S. (2016). High school athletes’ perceptions of the motivational climate in their off-season training programs. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research , 31 (3), 736–742.
• deCharms, R. (1976). Enhancing motivation: Change in classroom . New York, NY: Irvington.
• de Charms, R. (1984). Motivation enhancement in educational settings. In R. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Vol. 1. Student motivation (pp. 275–310). Gainesville, FL: Academic Press.
• deCharms, R. (1968). Personal causation: The internal affective determinants of behavior . New York, NY: Academic Press.
• Chatzisarantis, N. L. , & Hagger, M. S. (2007). The moral worth of sport reconsidered: Contributions of recreational sport and competitive sport to life aspirations and psychological well-being. Journal of Sports Sciences , 25 , 1047–1056.
• Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. , & Hagger, M. S. (2009). Effects of an intervention based on self-determination theory on self-reported leisure-time physical activity participation . Psychology and Health , 24 , 29–48.
• Chemolli, E. , & Gagné, M. (2014). Evidence against the continuum structure underlying motivation measures derived from self-determination theory. Psychological Assessment , 26 (2), 575–585.
• Corrion, K. , D’Arippe-Longueville, F. , Chalabaev, A. , Schiano-Lomoriello, S. , Roussel, P. , & Cury, F. (2010). Effect of implicit theories on judgement of cheating acceptability in physical education: The mediating role of achievement goals. Journal of Sport Sciences , 28 (8), 909–919.
• Cumming, J. , Hall, C. , Harwood, C. , & Gammage, K. (2002). Motivational orientations and imagery use: A goal profiling analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences , 20 , 127–136.
• Cury, F. , Biddle, S. , Famose, J. P. , Goudas, M. , Sarrazin, P. , & Durand, M. (1996). Personal and situational factors influencing intrinsic interest of adolescent girls in physical education: A structural equation modeling analysis. Educational Psychology , 16 , 305–314.
• Cury, F. , Da Fonséca, D. , Rufo, M. , Peres, C. , & Sarrazin, P. (2003). The trichotomous model and investment in learning to prepare for a sport test: A mediational analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology , 73 , 529–543.
• Cury, F. , Elliot, A. , Sarrazin, P. , Da Fonséca, D. , & Rufo, M. (2002). The trichotomous achievement goal model and intrinsic motivation: A sequential mediational analysis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 38 , 473–481.
• Cury, F. , Da Fonséca, D. , Rufo, M. , & Sarrazin, P. (2002). Perceptions of competence, implicit theory of ability, perception of motivational climate, and achievement goals: A test of the trichotomous conceptualization of endorsement of achievement motivation in the physical education setting. Perceptual and Motor Skills , 95 , 233–244.
• Cury, F. , Da Fonséca, D. , Zahn, I. , & Elliot, A. (2008). Implicit theories and IQ test performance: A sequential mediational analysis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 44 , 783–791.
• Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior . New York, NY: Plenum.
• Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development and health. Canadian Psychology , 49 , 182–185.
• Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In R. Deinstbier (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. 38, pp. 237–288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
• Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Motivation, personality, and development within embedded social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. In P. E. Nathan (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation (pp. 85–107).
• Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why: of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry , 11 (4), 227–268.
• DiBartolo, P. M. , Frost, R. O. , Chang, P. , LaSota, M. , & Grills, A. E. (2004). Shedding light on the relationship between personal standards and psychopathology: The case of contingent self-worth. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy , 22 , 241–254.
• Duda, J. L. (2001). Achievement goal research in sport: Pushing the boundaries and clarifying some issues. In G. C. Roberts (Ed.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 129–183). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Duda, J. L. (2005). Motivation in sport. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 318–335). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
• Duda, J. L. (2013). The conceptual and empirical foundations of empowering coaching: Setting the stage for the PAPA project. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 11 , 311–318.
• Duda, J. L. , Chi, L. , Newton, M. D. , Walling, M. D. , & Catley, D. (1995). Task and ego orientation and intrinsic motivation in sport. International Journal of Sport Psychology , 26 , 40–63.
• Duda, J. L. , & Hall, H. (2001). Achievement goal theory in sport: Recent extensions and future directions. In R. N. Singer , H. A. Hausenblas , & C. M. Janelle (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (2nd ed., pp. 417–443). New York, NY: Wiley.
• Duda, J. L. , & Whitehead, J. (1998). Measurement of goal perspectives in the physical domain. In J. L. Duda (Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement (pp. 21–48). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.
• Dweck, C. S. (1975). The role of expectations and attributions in the alleviation of learned helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 31 , 674–685.
• Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist , 41 , 1040–1048.
• Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development . Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
• Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development . New York, NY: Routledge.
• Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success . New York, NY: Random House.
• Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets and human nature: Promoting change in the Middle East, the schoolyard, the racial divide, and willpower. American Psychologist , 67 (8), 614–622.
• Dweck, C. S. , & Elliot, A. J. (1983). Achievement motivation. In P. Mussen & E. M. Heatherington (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 643–691). New York, NY: Wiley.
• Dweck, C. S. , & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review , 95 , 265–273.
• Dweck, C. S. , Chiu, S. , & Hong, Y. (1995). Implicit theories and their role in judgements and reactions: A word from two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry , 6 , 267–285.
• Elliot, A. J. (1994). Approach and avoidance achievement goals: An intrinsic motivation analysis . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
• Elliot, A. J. (1997). Integrating the “classic” and “contemporary” approaches to achievement motivation: A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement goals (Vol. 10, pp. 143–179). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist , 34 , 149–169.
• Elliot, A. J. , & Conroy, D. E. (2005). Beyond the dichotomous model of achievement goals in sport and exercise psychology. Sport and Exercise Psychology Review , 1 , 17–25.
• Elliot, A. J. , & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance motivation achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 70 , 461–475.
• Elliott, E. S. , & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 54 , 5–12.
• Ford, M. E. (1992). Motivating humans: Goals, emotions, and personal agency beliefs . Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
• Fortier, M. S. , Sweet, S. N. , O’Sullivan, T. L. , & Williams, G. C. (2007). A self-determination process model of physical activity adoption in the context of a randomized control trial. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 8 , 741–757.
• Fox, K. , Goudas, M. , Biddle, S. , Duda, J. , & Armstrong, N. (1994). Children’s task and ego goal profiles in sport. British Journal of Educational Psychology , 64 , 253–261.
• Frenet, C. , Guay, F. , & Senecal, C. (2004). Adjusting to job demands: The role of work self-determination and job control in predicting burnout. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 65 , 39–56.
• Froreich, F. V. , Vartanian, L. R. , Zawadzki, M. J. , Grisham, J. R. , & Touyz, S. W. (2017). Psychological need satisfaction, control, and disordered eating . British Journal of Clinical Psychology , 56 , 53–68.
• Fry, M. D. , & Gano-Overway, L. A. (2010). Exploring the contribution of the caring climate to the youth sport experience. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology , 22 (3), 294–304.
• Gagné, M. , & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 26 , 331–362.
• Gagné, M. , & Forest, J. (2008). The study of compensation systems through the lens of Self-Determination Theory: Reconciling 35 years of debate. Canadian Psychology , 49 , 225–232.
• Gernigon, C. , d’Arripe-Loungeville, F. , Delignères, D. , & Ninot, G. (2004). A dynamical systems perspective on goal involvement states in sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 26 , 572–596.
• Gould, D. (1996). Personal motivation gone awry: Burnout in competitive athletes. Quest , 48 , 275–289.
• Gould, D. (2010). Goal setting for peak performance. In J. M. Williams (Ed.), Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (6th ed., pp. 201–220). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Hair, J. F., Jr. , Anderson, R. E. , Tatham, R. L. , & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Hair, J. F., Jr. , Black, W. C. , Babin, B. J. , & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
• Hall, H. K. , & Byrne, A. T. J. (1988). Goal setting in sport: Clarifying recent anomalies. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 10 , 184–198.
• Hall, H. K. , & Kerr, A. W. (1997). Motivational antecedents of precompetitive anxiety in youth sport. Sport Psychologist , 11 , 24–42.
• Hall, H. K. , & Kerr, A. W. (2001). Goal-setting in sport and physical activity. Tracing empirical developments and establishing conceptual direction. In G. C. Roberts (Ed.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 183–234). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Halvari, A. , Halvari, H. , Bjørnebekk, G. , & Deci, E. L. (2013). Oral health and dental well-being: Testing a self-determination theory model. Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 43 , 275–292.
• Hardy, L. (1998). Responses to the reactants on three myths in applied consultancy work. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology , 10 , 212–219.
• Hardy, L. , Jones, J. G. , & Gould, D. (1996). Understanding psychological preparation for sport: Theory and practice of elite performers . Chichester, UK: Wiley.
• Harwood, C. G. , Cumming, J. , & Fletcher, D. (2004). Motivational profiles and psychological skills use within elite youth sport. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology , 16 , 318–332.
• Harwood, C. G. , & Hardy, L. (2001). Persistence and effort in moving achievement goal research forward: A response to Treasure and colleagues. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 23 , 330–345.
• Harwood, C. G. , Hardy, L. , & Swain, A. B. J. (2000). Achievement goals in sport: A critique of conceptual and measurement issues. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 22 , 235–255.
• Harwood, C. G. , Keegan, R. J. , Smith, J. M. J. , & Raine, A. S. (2015). A systematic review of the intrapersonal correlates of motivational climate perceptions in sport and physical activity. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 18 , 9–25.
• Harwood, C. G. , Spray, C. M. , & Keegan, R. (2008). Achievement goal theories in sport. In T. S. Horn (Ed.), Advances in sport psychology (pp. 157–186). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Harwood, C. G. , & Swain, A. B. J. (1998). Antecedents of pre-competition achievement goals in elite junior players. Journal of Sports Sciences , 16 , 357–371.
• Heslin, P. A. , Latham, G. P. , & VandeWalle, D. (2005). The effect of implicit person theory on performance appraisals. Journal of Applied Psychology , 90 , 842–856.
• Heslin, P. A. , & Vandewalle, D. (2008). Manager’s implicit assumptions about personnel. Current Directions in Psychological Science , 17 (3), 219–223.
• Hodge, K. , & Petlichkoff, L. (2000). Goal profiles in sport motivation: A cluster analysis. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 22 , 256–272.
• Iwasaki, S. , & Fry, M. D. (2016). Female adolescent soccer players’ perceived motivational climate, goal orientations, and mindful engagement. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 27 , 222–231.
• Kaplan, A. , & Maehr, M. L. (2007). The contributions and prospects of goal orientation theory. Educational Psychological Review , 19 , 141–184.
• Kasser, T. , & Ryan, R. M. (1996). Further examining the American dream: Differential correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 22 , 280–287.
• Kingston, K. M. , & Wilson, K. M. (2009). The application of goal setting in sport. In S. Mellalieu & S. Hanton (Eds.), Advances in sport psychology: A review (pp. 75–123). New York, NY: Routledge.
• Koestner, R. , & Losier, G. F. (2002). Distinguishing three ways of being highly motivated: A closer look at introjection, identification, and intrinsic motivation. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 101–121). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
• Kuczka, K. K. , & Treasure, D. C. (2005). Self-handicapping in competitive sport: Influence of the motivational climate, self-efficacy, and perceived importance. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 6 , 539–550.
• Lam, A. C. , Ruzek, A. A. , Schenke, K. , Conley, A. M. , & Karabenick, S. A. (2015). Student perceptions of classroom achievement goal structure: Is it appropriate to aggregate? Journal of Educational Psychology , 107 (4), 1102–1115.
• Lemyre, P. N. , Hall, H. K. , & Roberts, G. C. (2008). A social cognitive approach to burnout in elite athletes. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports , 18 , 221–234.
• Lemyre, P. N. , Ommundsen, Y. , & Roberts, G. C. (2000). Moral functioning in sport: The role of dispositional goals and perceived ability. International Journal of Psychology , 35 (3–4), 23.
• Lemyre, P. N. , Roberts, G. C. , & Ommundsen, Y. (2002). Achievement goal orientations, perceived ability and sportspersonship in youth soccer. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology , 14 , 120–136.
• Lemyre, P.-N. , Roberts, G. C. , & Stray-Gundersen, J. (2007). Motivation, overtraining and burnout: Can self-determined motivation predict overtraining and burnout in elite athletes. European Journal of Sport Sciences , 7 , 115–132.
• Lemyre, P.-N. , Treasure, D. C. , & Roberts, G. C. (2006). Influence of variability in motivation & affect on elite athlete burnout. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 28 , 32–48.
• Lochbaum, M. R. , Kazak Cetinkalp, Z. , Graham, K. , Wright, T. , & Zazo, R. (2016). Task and ego goal orientations in competitive sport: A quantitative review of the literature from 1989–2016. Kinesiology , 48 , 3–29.
• Lochbaum, M. R. , Stevenson, S. , & Hilario, D. (2009). Achievement goals, thoughts about intense physical activity, and exerted effort: A mediational analysis. Journal of Sport Behavior , 32 , 53–68.
• Locke, E. A. , & Latham, G. P. (1985). The application of goal setting to sports. Journal of Sport Psychology , 7 (3), 205–222.
• Maehr, M. L. , & Braskamp, L. A. (1986). The motivation factor: A theory of personal investment . Lexington, MA: Lexington Books/Heath.
• Maehr, M. L. , & Nicholls, J. G. (1980). Culture and achievement motivation: A second look. In N. Warren (Ed.), Studies in cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 221–267). New York, NY: Academic Press.
• Maehr, M. L. , & Zusho, A. (2009). Achievement goal theory: The past, present, and future. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 77–104). New York, NY: Routledge.
• Mangels, J. A. , Butterfield, B. , Lamb, J. , Good, C. , & Dweck, C. S. (2006). Why do beliefs about intelligence influence learning success? A social cognitive neuroscience model. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience , 1 , 75–86.
• Marsh, H. W. , Craven, R. , Hinkley, J. W. , & Debus, R. L. (2003). Evaluation of the big-two-factor theory of academic motivation orientations: An evaluation of jingle-jangle fallacies. Multivariate Behavioral Research , 38 , 189–224.
• Martinent, G. , & Decret, J.-C. (2015). Motivational profiles among young table-tennis players in intensive training settings: A latent profile transition analysis. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology , 27 , 268–287.
• Middleton, M. J. , & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology , 89 , 710–718.
• Miller, B. W. , Roberts, G. C. , & Ommundsen, Y. (2004). Effect of motivational climate on sportspersonship among competitive youth male and female football players. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports , 14 , 193–202.
• Milyavskaya, M. , Gingras, I. , Mageau, G. A. , Koestner, R. , Gagnon, H. , Fang, J. , & Boiche, J. (2009). Balance across contexts: Importance of balanced need satisfaction across various life domains. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 35 , 1031–1045.
• Morin, A. J. S. , Marsh, H. W. , Nagengast, B. , & Scalas, L. C. (2014). Doubly latent multilevel analyses and classroom climate: An illustration. Journal of Experimental Education , 82 (2), 143–167.
• Moser, J. S. , Schroder, H. S. , Heeter, C. , Moran, T. P. , & Lee, Y.-H. (2011). Mins your errors: Evidence for neural mechanism linking growth mind-set to adaptive posterror adjustments. Psychological Science , 22 , 1484–1489.
• Mouratidis, A. , & Michou, A. (2011). Perfectionism, self-determined motivation, and coping among adolescent athletes. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 12 , 355–367.
• Nicholls, J. G. (1976). Effort is virtuous, but it’s better to have ability: Evaluative responses to perceptions of effort and ability. Journal of Research in Personality , 10 , 306–315.
• Nicholls, J. G. (1978). The development of the concepts of effort and ability, perception of academic attainment, and the understanding that difficult tasks require more ability. Child Development , 49 , 800–814.
• Nicholls, J. G. (1979). Quality and equality in intellectual development: The role of motivation in education. American Psychologist , 34 , 1071–1084.
• Nicholls, J. G. (1981, August). An intentional theory of achievement motivation. In W. U. Meyer & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attributional approaches to human behavior . Symposium presented at the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies, Germany, University of Bielefeld.
• Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, mastery choice and performance. Psychological Review , 91 (3), 328–346.
• Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Conceptions of ability and achievement motivation. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Goals and cognitions (pp. 39–73). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
• Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Nicholls, J. G. (1992). The general and the specific in the development and expression of achievement motivation. In G. C. Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 31–57). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Nicholls, J. G. , & Miller, A. T. (1983). The differentiation of the concepts of difficulty and ability. Child Development , 54 , 951–959.
• Nicholls, J. G. , & Miller, A. T. (1984). Development and its discontents: The differentiation of the concept of ability. In J. G. Nicholls (Ed.), Advances in motivation and achievement: The development of achievement motivation (Vol. 3, pp. 185–218). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Ntoumanis, N. (2001). Empirical links between achievement goal theory and self-determination theory in sport. Journal of Sport Sciences , 19 , 397–409.
• Ntoumanis, N. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on motivation in sport and physical education: Current trends and possible future research directions. In G. C. Roberts & D. C. Treasure (Eds.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (Vol. 3, pp. 91–128). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Ntoumanis, N. , & Biddle, S. J. H. (1999). A review of motivational climate in physical activity. Journal of Sport Sciences , 17 , 643–665.
• Nussbaum, A. D. , & Dweck, C. S. (2008). Defensiveness versus remediation: Self-theories and modes of self-esteem maintenance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 34 , 500–612.
• Ommundsen, Y. (2001a). Pupils’ affective responses in physical education classes: The association of implicit theories of the nature of ability and achievement goals. European Physical Education Review , 7 , 219–242.
• Ommundsen, Y. (2001b). Self-handicapping strategies in physical education classes: The influence of implicit theories of the nature of ability and achievement goal orientations. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 2 , 139–156.
• Ommundsen, Y. (2001c). Students’ implicit theories of ability in physical education classes: The influence of motivational aspects of the learning environment. Learning Environments Research , 4 , 139–158.
• Ommundsen, Y. (2003). Implicit theories of ability and self-regulation strategies in physical education classes. Educational Psychology , 23 , 141–157.
• Ommundsen, Y. , & Roberts, G. C. (1999). Effect of motivational climate profiles on motivational indices in team sport. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports , 9 , 389–397.
• Ommundsen, Y. , & Roberts, G. C. (1999). Concomitants of motivational climate in team sport. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports , 9 , 389–397.
• Ommundsen, Y. , Roberts, G. C. , & Kavussanu, M. (1998). Perceived motivational climate and cognitive and affective correlates among Norwegian athletes. Journal of Sports Sciences , 16 , 153–164.
• Ommundsen, Y. , Roberts, G. C. , Lemyre, P. N. , & Treasure, D. (2003). Perceived motivational climate in male youth soccer: Relations to social-moral functioning, sportspersonship and team norm perceptions. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 4 , 397–413.
• Papaioannou, A. (1994). Development of a questionnaire to measure achievement orientations in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport , 65 , 11–20.
• Papaioannou, A. G. , Ziurbanos, N. , Krommidas, C. & Ampatatzoglou, G. (2012). The place of achievement goals in the context of sport: A comparison of Nicholls’s and Elliot’s models. In G. C. Roberts & D. C. Treasure (Eds.), Advances in Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 59–90). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Paunesku, D. , Walton, G. M. , Romero, C. , Smith, E. N. , Yeager, D. S. , & Dweck, C. A. (2015). Mind-set interventions are a scalable treatment for academic underachievement. Psychological Science , 26 (6), 784–793.
• Payne, S. C. , Youngcourt, S. S. , & Beaubien, J. M. (2007). A meta-analytic examination of goal orientation nomological net. Journal of Applied Psychology , 92 , 128–150.
• Pensgaard, A.-M. , & Roberts, G. C. (2000). The relationship between motivational climate, perceived ability and sources of distress among elite athletes. Journal of Sport Sciences , 18 , 191–200.
• Pensgaard, A.-M. , & Roberts, G. C. (2002). Elite athletes’ experiences of the motivational climate: The coach matters. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports , 12 , 54–60.
• Pinder, C. C. (1984). Work motivation . Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
• Preacher, K. J. , Zhang, Z. , & Zyphur, M. J. (2016). Multilevel structural equation models for assessing moderation within and across levels of analysis. Psychological Methods , 21 (2), 189–205.
• Quested, E. , & Duda, J. L. (2011). Enhancing children’s sport experiences and personal development: A motivational perspective. In R. Bailey & I. Stafford (Eds.), Coaching children in sport (pp. 123–138). London, UK: Routledge.
• Rawsthorne, L. J. , & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review , 3 (4), 326–344.
• Roberts, G. C. (1992). Motivation in sport: Conceptual constraints and convergence. In G. C. Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 3–30). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Roberts, G. C. (2001). Understanding the dynamics of motivation in physical activity: The influence of achievement goals on motivational processes. In G. C. Roberts (Ed.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise . Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Roberts, G. C. (2012). Motivation in sport and exercise from an achievement goal theory perspective: After 30 years, where are we? In G. C. Roberts & D. Treasure (Eds.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (Vol. 3, pp. 5–58). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Roberts, G. C. , & Ommundsen, Y. (1996). Effect of goal orientation on achievement beliefs, cognition and strategies in team sport. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports , 6 (1), 46–56.
• Roberts, G. C. , & Treasure, D. C. (1992). Children in sport. Sport Science review , 2 , 46–54.
• Roberts, G. C. , Treasure, D. C. , & Balague, G. (1998). Achievement goals in sport: The development and validation of the Perception of Success Questionnaire. Journal of Sport Science Review , 16 , 337–347.
• Roberts, G. C. , Treasure, D. C. , & Conroy, D. E. (2007). Understanding the dynamics of motivation in sport and physical activity. In G. Tenenbaum & R. C. Eklund (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (3rd ed., pp. 3–30). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
• Roberts, G. C. , Treasure, D. C. , & Kavussanu, M. (1996). Orthogonality of achievement goals and its relationship to beliefs about success and satisfaction in sport. The Sport Psychologist , 10 , 398–408.
• Roberts, G. C. , Treasure, D. C. , & Kavussanu, M. (1997). Motivation in physical activity contexts: An achievement goal perspective. In P. Pintrich & M. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 413–447). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
• Roberts J. M. , & Sutton-Smith B. (1962). Child training and game involvement. Ethnology , 1 (2), 166–185.
• Robins, R. W. , & Pals, J. L. (2002). Implicit self-theories in the academic domain: Implications for goal orientation, attributions, affect, and self-esteem change. Self and Identity , 1 , 313–336.
• Ross, M. (1989). Relation of implicit theories to the construct of personal histories. Psychological Review , 96 , 341–357.
• Ryan, R. M. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes. Journal of Personality , 63 , 397–427.
• Ryan, R. M. , & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 57 , 749–761.
• Ryan, R. M. , & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist , 55 , 68–78.
• Ryan, R. M. , & Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In R. M. Ryan & E. L. Deci (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (p. 431). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
• Ryan, R. M. , Patrick, M. H. , Deci, E. L. , & Williams, G. C. (2008). Facilitating health behavior change and its maintenance: Interventions based on self-determination theory. European Health Psychologist , 10 , 2–5.
• Ryan, R. M. , Williams, G. C. , Patrick, M. H. , & Deci, E. L. (2009). Self-determination theory and physical activity: The dynamic of motivation in development and wellness. Hellenic Journal of Psychology , 6 , 107–124.
• Ryan, R. M. , Sheldon, K. M. , Kasser, T. , & Deci, E. L. (1996). All goals are not created equal: An organismic perspective on the nature of goals and their regulation. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 7–26). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
• Sarrazin, P. , Roberts, G. C. , Cury, F. , Biddle, S. , & Famose, J.-P. (2002). Exerted effort and performance in climbing among boys: The influence of achievement goals, perceived ability, and task difficulty. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport , 73 , 425–436.
• Skaalvik, E. M. (1997). Self-enhancing and self-defeating ego orientation: Relations with task and avoidance orientation, achievement, self-perceptions, and anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology , 89 , 71–81.
• Skaalvik, S. (1993). Ego-involvement and self-protection among slow learners: Four case studies. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research , 37 , 305–315.
• Smith, A. L. , Balaguer, I. , & Duda, J. L. (2006). Goal orientation profile differences on perceived motivational climate, perceived peer relationships, and motivation-related responses of youth athletes. Journal of Sport Sciences , 24 (12), 1315–1327.
• Solberg, P. A. , & Halvari, H. (2009). Perceived autonomy support, personal goal content, and emotional well-being among elite athletes. Perceptual and Motor Skills , 108 (3), 721–743.
• Solstad, B. (2016) Toward a better understanding of the dynamics of sport coaching at the children’s level. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Norwegian School of Sport Science, Oslo, Norway.
• Solstad, B. E. , Stenling, A. , Ommundsen, Y. , Wold, B. , Heuzé, J. P. , Sarrazin, P. , . . . Duda, J. (forthcoming). Initial psychometric testing of the coach version of the Empowering and Disempowering Motivational Climate Questionnaire (EDMCQ): A Bayesian approach.
• Spinath, B. , & Steinmayr, R. (2012). The role of competence beliefs and goal orientations for change in intrinsic motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology , 104 (4), 1135–1148.
• Spray, C. M. , Wang, C. K. , Biddle, S. J. H. , Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. , & Warburton, V. E. (2006). An experimental test of self-theories of ability in youth sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 7 , 255–267.
• Standage, M. , Duda, J. L. , & Ntoumanis, N. (2003). Predicting motivational regulations in physical education: The interplay between dispositional goal orientations, motivational climate and perceived competence. Journal of Sports Sciences , 21 , 631–647.
• Standage, M. , & Ryan, R. (2012). Self-determination theory and exercise motivation: Facilitating self-regulatory processes to support health and well-being. In G. C. Roberts & D. C. Treasure (Eds.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 233–269). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Standage, M. , Treasure, D. C. , Hooper, K. , & Kuczka, K. (2007). Self-handicapping in school physical education: The influence of the motivational climate. British Journal of Educational Psychology , 77 , 81–99.
• Swain, A. B. J. , & Harwood, C. G. (1996). Antecedents of state goals in age-group swimmers: An interactionist perspective. Journal of Sport Sciences , 14 , 111–124.
• Theeboom, M. , DeKnop, P. , & Weiss, M. R. (1995). Motivational climate, psychological responses, and motor skill development in children’s sport: A field-based intervention study. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 17 , 294–311.
• Thogersen-Ntoumani, C. , Ntoumanis, N. , & Nikitaras, N. (2010). Unhealthy weight control behaviours in adolescent girls: A process model based on self-determination theory. Psychology and Health , 25 , 535–550.
• Treasure, D. C. (1997). Perceptions of the motivational climate and elementary school children’s cognitive and affective response. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 19 , 278–290.
• Treasure, D. C. (2001). Enhancing young people’s motivation in youth sport: An achievement goal approach. In G. C. Roberts (Ed.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 79–100). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Treasure, D. C. , Duda, J. L. , Hall, H. K. , Roberts, G. C. , Ames, C. , & Maehr, M. L. (2001). Clarifying misconceptions in achievement goal research in sport: A response to Harwood, Hardy, and Swain. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 23 , 317–329.
• Treasure, D. C. , Lemyre, N. , Kuczka, K. K. , & Standage, M. (2007). Motivation in elite sport: A self-determination perspective . In M. Hagger & N. Chatzisarantis (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in exercise and sport (pp. 153–165). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
• Treasure, D. C. , & Roberts, G. C. (1995). Applications of achievement goal theory to physical education: Implications for enhancing motivation. Quest , 47 , 475–489.
• Treasure, D. C. , & Roberts, G. C. (1998). Relationship between female adolescents’ achievement goal orientations, perceptions of the motivational climate, belief about success and sources of satisfaction in basketball. International Journal of Sport Psychology , 29 , 211–230.
• Treasure, D. C. , & Roberts, G. C. (2001). Students’ perceptions of the motivational climate, achievement beliefs and satisfaction in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport , 72 , 165–175.
• Van den Broeck, A. , Ferris, D. L. , Chang, C. H. , & Rosen, C. C. (2016). A review of self-determination theory’s basic psychological needs at work. Journal of Management , 42 , 1195–1229.
• Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 29, pp. 271–360). New York, NY: Academic Press.
• Vallerand, R. J. , Fortier, M. S. , & Guay, F. (1997). Self-determination and persistence in a real-life setting: Toward a motivational model of high school dropout. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 72 , 1161–1176.
• Vallerand, R. J. , Pelletier, L. G. , & Koestner, R. (2008). Reflections on self-determination theory. Canadian Psychology , 49 , 257–262.
• Vallerand, R. J. , & Rousseau, F. L. (2001). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in sport and exercise: A review using the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In R. N. Singer , H. A. Hausenblas , & C. M. Janelle (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (pp. 389–416. New York, NY: Wiley.
• Vansteenkiste, M. , & Ryan, R. M. (2013). On psychological growth and vulnerability: Basic psychological need satisfaction and need frustration as a unifying principle. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration , 23 , 263–280.
• Walling, M. D. , & Duda, J. L. (1995). Goals and their associations with beliefs about success in and perceptions of the purpose of physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education , 14 , 140–156.
• Wang, C. K. J. , & Biddle, S. J. H. (2001). Young people’s motivational profiles in physical activity: A cluster analysis. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 23 , 1–22.
• Wang, C. K. J. , Biddle, S. J. H. , & Elliot, A. J. (2007). The 2x2 achievement goal framework in a physical education context. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 8 , 147–168.
• Wang, C. K. J. , Woon, C. L. , Biddle, S. J. H. , & Spray C. M. (2005). Cross-cultural validation of the Conceptions of the Nature of Athletic Ability Questionnaire version 2. Personality and Individual Differences , 38 , 1245–1256.
• Weiner, B. (1972). Theories of motivation: From mechanism to cognition . Chicago, IL: Markham.
• Wilhelmsen, T. , Sorensen, M. , & Seippel, Ø. (in press). «Motivational pathways to social and pedagogical inclusion in physical education». Adapted Physical Education Quarterly.
• Williams, G. C. , Gagné, M. , Ryan, R. M. , & Deci, E. L. (2002). Facilitating autonomous motivation for smoking cessation. Health Psychology , 21 , 40–50.
• Williams, G. C. , McGregor, H. A. , Zeldman, A. , Freedman, Z. R. , & Deci, E. L. (2004). Testing a self-determination theory process model for promoting glycemic control through diabetes self-management. Health Psychology , 23 , 58–66.

Related Articles

• Theoretical Approaches to Physical Activity Promotion
• Psychological Skills Training and the Impact on Military Performance Readiness
• Goal Setting in Sport and Performance

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Psychology. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 20 April 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|185.66.14.236]
• 185.66.14.236

Character limit 500 /500

Module 6: Designing a Motivating Work Environment

6.7 optional case study: motivation at xerox.

Figure 6.11 Anne Mulcahy, Former Xerox Chairman of the Board (left), and Ursula Burns, Xerox CEO (right) Source: Photo courtesy of Xerox Corporation.

As of 2010, Xerox Corporation (NYSE: XRX) is a $22 billion, multinational company founded in 1906 and operating in 160 countries. Xerox is headquartered in Norwalk, Connecticut, and employs 130,000 people. How does a company of such size and magnitude effectively manage and motivate employees from diverse backgrounds and experiences? Such companies depend on the productivity and performance of their employees. The journey over the last 100 years has withstood many successes and failures. In 2000, Xerox was facing bankruptcy after years of mismanagement, piles of debt, and mounting questions about its accounting practices.

Anne Mulcahy turned Xerox around. Mulcahy joined Xerox as an employee in 1976 and moved up the corporate ladder, holding several management positions until she became CEO in 2001. In 2005, Mulcahy was named by Fortune magazine as the second most powerful woman in business. Based on a lifetime of experience with Xerox, she knew that the company had powerful employees who were not motivated when she took over. Mulcahy believed that among other key businesses changes, motivating employees at Xerox was a key way to pull the company back from the brink of failure. One of her guiding principles was a belief that in order to achieve customer satisfaction, employees must be interested and motivated in their work. Mulcahy not only successfully saw the company through this difficult time but also was able to create a stronger and more focused company.

In 2009, Mulcahy became the chairman of Xerox’s board of directors and passed the torch to Ursula Burns, who became the new CEO of Xerox. Burns became not only the first African American woman CEO to head a Standard & Poor’s (S&P) company but also the first woman to succeed another woman as the head of an S&P 100 company. Burns is also a lifetime Xerox employee who has been with the company for over 30 years. She began as a graduate intern and was hired full time after graduation. Because of her tenure with Xerox, she has close relationships with many of the employees, which provides a level of comfort and teamwork. She describes Xerox as a nice family. She maintains that Mulcahy created a strong and successful business but encouraged individuals to speak their mind, to not worry about hurting one another’s feelings, and to be more critical.

Burns explains that she learned early on in her career, from her mentors at Xerox, the importance of managing individuals in different ways and not intentionally intimidating people but rather relating to them and their individual perspectives. As CEO, she wants to encourage people to get things done, take risks, and not be afraid of those risks. She motivates her teams by letting them know what her intentions and priorities are. The correlation between a manager’s leadership style and the productivity and motivation of employees is apparent at Xerox, where employees feel a sense of importance and a part of the process necessary to maintain a successful and profitable business. In 2010, Anne Mulcahy retired from her position on the board of directors to pursue new projects.

Discussion Questions

• How do you think Xerox was able to motivate its employees through the crisis it faced in 2000?
• How does a CEO with such a large number of employees communicate priorities to a worldwide workforce?
• How might Ursula Burns motivate employees to take calculated risks?
• Both Anne Mulcahy and Ursula Burns were lifetime employees of Xerox. How does an organization attract and keep individuals for such a long period of time?
• An Introduction to Organizational Behavior. Authored by : Anonymous. Provided by : Anonymous. Located at : http://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/an-introduction-to-organizational-behavior-v1.1/ . License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike

Privacy Policy

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Cambridge Open

On what motivates us: a detailed review of intrinsic v. extrinsic motivation

Laurel s. morris.

1 Department of Psychiatry, Depression and Anxiety Center for Discovery and Treatment, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029 USA

Mora M. Grehl

2 Department of Psychology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122 USA

Sarah B. Rutter

Marishka mehta, margaret l. westwater.

3 Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06510 USA

Motivational processes underlie behaviors that enrich the human experience, and impairments in motivation are commonly observed in psychiatric illness. While motivated behavior is often examined with respect to extrinsic reinforcers, not all actions are driven by reactions to external stimuli; some are driven by ‘intrinsic’ motivation. Intrinsically motivated behaviors are computationally similar to extrinsically motivated behaviors, in that they strive to maximize reward value and minimize punishment. However, our understanding of the neurocognitive mechanisms that underlie intrinsically motivated behavior remains limited. Dysfunction in intrinsic motivation represents an important trans-diagnostic facet of psychiatric symptomology, but due to a lack of clear consensus, the contribution of intrinsic motivation to psychopathology remains poorly understood. This review aims to provide an overview of the conceptualization, measurement, and neurobiology of intrinsic motivation, providing a framework for understanding its potential contributions to psychopathology and its treatment. Distinctions between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are discussed, including divergence in the types of associated rewards or outcomes that drive behavioral action and choice. A useful framework for understanding intrinsic motivation, and thus separating it from extrinsic motivation, is developed and suggestions for optimization of paradigms to measure intrinsic motivation are proposed.

Introduction

Motivation is an integral component of human experience. Children spontaneously explore novel items, and adults autonomously engage in new hobbies, even in the absence of clear extrinsic reinforcers. Thus, not all actions are driven by tangible external stimuli or outcomes, known as ‘extrinsic’ motivation, but are driven by more internal drivers, known as ‘intrinsic’ motivation, where the activity is perceived as its own outcome.

Intrinsically motivated behaviors are computationally similar to extrinsically motivated behaviors, in that they strive to maximize goal attainment and minimize punishment, represented mathematically as value and effort cost functions, respectively (Gottlieb, Lopes, & Oudeyer, 2016 ). However, subjective internal value functions are difficult to characterize, and our understanding of how they are computed and integrated is limited (Gottlieb et al., 2016 ).

Dysfunction in intrinsic motivation represents an important transdiagnostic facet of psychiatric symptomology, which is often classified as distinct psychological constructs, such as apathy in neurological disorders, anhedonia in depression, and negative symptoms in schizophrenia. Each of these symptom domains may be underpinned by a shared dysfunction of intrinsic motivation, and interventions targeting intrinsic motivation have the potential to improve treatment outcomes for affected individuals.

However, due to a lack of clear consensus, the contribution of intrinsic motivation to psychiatric disorders remains poorly understood. This review aims to provide an overview of the conceptualization, measurement, and neurobiology of intrinsic motivation, providing a framework for understanding the potential contributions to psychopathology and its treatment.

Historical conceptualizations of intrinsic motivation

During the early 20th century, prominent descriptions of motivation were at odds with each other. Woodworth ( 1918 ) suggested that intrinsic motivation governed activities perpetuated by their own ‘native drive’, whereas Thorndike ( 1911 ) and Watson ( 1913 ) argued that external stimuli governed behavior. Also centered on internal drives, Hull's ( 1943 ) ‘drive theory’ posited that all behaviors were performed to seek or avoid primary biological states, including hunger or pain. However, the drive theory could not explain many behavioral anomalies, such as hungry rats withstanding painful electric shocks to explore a novel environment (Nissen, 1930 ), or rhesus monkeys performing a puzzle task for no biological reason or external reinforcer (Harlow, 1950 ). By narrowly presuming that biological states drive all behavior, drive theory failed to account for instances in which an organism prioritizes higher-order cognitive drives over physiological ones.

The shortcomings of drive theory led to the emergence of alternate theories of intrinsic motivation. Some argued that homeostatic maintenance of optimal biological or cognitive states (Hebb, 1955 ; McClelland & Clark, 1953 ; McClelland, Atkinson, Clark, & Lowell, 1967 ), or mitigation of incongruency or uncertainty (Festinger, 1957 ; Kagan, 1972 ), drove behavior. However, these theories emphasized external stimuli or cognitive representations of external goal states as key drivers of behavior. In the mid-to-late 20th century, several models underscored the importance of novelty-seeking, interest, and autonomy in driving intrinsic motivation. Novelty-seeking was suggested to energize approach behavior via curiosity and exploration that leads to skill mastery, information attainment, or learning (Kaplan & Oudeyer, 2007 ). Interest and enjoyment in an activity might boost intrinsic motivation by engendering ‘flow’, a prolonged state of focus and enjoyment during task engagement that stretches one's skillset (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975 ; Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2009 ). Finally, self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1980 ) proposed that human needs for competence, achievement, and autonomy drive intrinsic motivation, aligning with observations that intrinsic motivation stems from an internal perceived autonomy during task engagement (DeCharms, 1968 ; Lamal, 2003 ). These models highlight the role of achievement and perceived autonomy (DeCharms, 1968 ) in driving intrinsic motivation, coinciding with current computational frameworks of intrinsic reward (Chew, Blain, Dolan, & Rutledge, 2021 ; Murayama, Matsumoto, Izuma, & Matsumoto, 2010 ).

The introduction of external goals: a shift to extrinsic motivation

While intrinsic motivation has been proposed to be divorced from external reinforcers, our understanding of motivation has been led largely by using external reinforcers as conceptual and experimental tools. Here, we briefly review historical perspectives on external drivers of motivated behavior, outlining prominent goal- and action-focused models of extrinsic motivation.

Early psychological models of extrinsic motivation suggested that ‘will’ and ‘intention’ fostered goal achievement, emphasizing the influence of goal expectation on action and control (Lewin, 1951 ; Tolman, 1932 ). Within this framework, environmental features, as well as an individual's internal state or memory, determine their actions when pursuing a goal, or, more specifically, the cognitive representation of a goal (Kagan, 1972 ). This requires multiple cognitive representations to be developed, maintained, and updated, with a particular reliance on external stimuli and learning (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999 ; Kagan, 1972 ; Kagan & Moss, 1983 ).

Alongside psychological model development, economic models of motivation emerged. These models propose that extrinsic goals, or incentives, elicit motivated behavior via a cost-benefit analysis, where motivated choice occurs when benefits outweigh costs. More recently, behavioral economics has considered how individual personality traits, biases, and irrationalities influence motivated behavior (Strombach, Strang, Park, & Kenning, 2016 ). A recent model (Strombach et al., 2016 ) incorporates various factors into the classical cost-benefit analysis, including traditional intrinsic (e.g. satisfaction) and extrinsic drivers (e.g. money), with negative influences from costs (e.g. effort, pain), which are merged into a single dynamic, subjective and state-dependent factor that drives motivated behavior. Though this approach is powerful, the explicit focus on incentives provides limited explanatory power for various paradoxical behaviors, including rodents overcoming the high cost to self-stimulate certain brain regions (e.g. nucleus accumbens; Nac) or extrinsic reinforcers' dampening effect on intrinsic motivation.

In reinforcement learning models of decision-making, an organism, or agent, learns which actions maximize total reward. This process has been formalized within computational sciences and modern artificial intelligence systems (Sutton & Barto, 1981 ; Witten, 1977 ), where learning and decision-making depend on an extrinsic outcome. One theory suggests that motivated action is driven solely by a need to reduce reward prediction errors (RPEs; Kaplan and Oudeyer, 2007 ), or the mismatch between expectation and outcome (Montague, Dayan, & Sejnowski, 1996 ; Schultz et al., 1997 ). RPEs can also be conceptualized as valuation signals for novel outcomes or unexpected stimuli. RPE-based learning then drives motivated behavior, or action choice, but even if the agent displays intact encoding of action or outcome value, motivated behavior can be dampened by reduced novelty. This highlights the role of novelty, expectation and prediction in learning per se , rather than choice valuation.

In action-focused models of motivation, incentives can trigger approach or avoidance behavior by signaling a potential goal state (Berridge, Robinson, & Aldridge, 2009 ). Incentive motivation thus relies on expectancy, probability, and value of outcomes, which are thought to dictate behavioral choice and decision-making. While greater reliance on stimulus-outcome rather than stimulus-response contingencies has led some to describe incentive motivation as proactive (Beckmann & Heckhausen, 2018 ), others have characterized it as reactive due to the central role of learning from past experience (Bolles, 1972 ). Reliance on an expected outcome was central to behaviorism (Watson, 1913 , 1930 ) and operant conditioning (Skinner, 1938 ), which assume that actions are driven by a reinforcer, and instrumental value is assigned to the behavior itself. Stimulus-response pairs dominate behaviorism and modern theories of habitual behavior (Gläscher, Daw, Dayan, & O'Doherty, 2010 ), where the dependency on previously reinforced actions ultimately governs motivated choice (de Wit et al., 2011 ; Gillan, Robbins, Sahakian, van den Heuvel, & van Wingen, 2016 ; Voon et al., 2014 ). However, this renders behaviors as repetitive, insensitive to punishment and divorced from goals (Robbins, Gillan, Smith, de Wit, & Ersche, 2012 ). Therefore, these action-focused models of motivated behavior almost entirely discount intrinsic motivation since extrinsic motivators usurp control of behavior.

Several limitations of extrinsic motivation models must be considered when attempting to characterize intrinsic motivation. First, for cost-benefit analysis and reinforcement learning, an internal representation of the outcome must first be learned, which requires previous experience of the goal. However, intrinsic motivation can occur for novel outcomes, or behaviors that are uncertain or ambiguous. Second, motivation can occur for activities that may already be fully predictable, marking a significant limitation for reinforcement-learning models of motivation, which assume that reward prediction errors drive learning for motivated action. Third, these frameworks cannot fully explain spontaneous novelty seeking or exploratory behavior, in which no external reward is expected and no cost is overcome (Deci et al., 1999 ; Marsden, Ma, Deci, Ryan, & Chiu, 2014 ).

Separating and integrating intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

A key question is whether intrinsic and extrinsic motivation can, or should, be experimentally or theoretically separated. There is some evidence that they are dissociable constructs at the neural level. The most compelling support comes from case reports of patients with basal ganglia lesions who developed ‘psychic akinesia’, a syndrome characterized by difficulty with self-generated action initiation but no difficulty in performing complex cognitive or motor tasks when prompted (Laplane, Baulac, Widlocher, & Dubois, 1984 ; Lugaresi, Montagna, Morreale, & Gallassi, 1990 ). In patients with alien hand syndrome, medial prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) lesions lead to a loss of intentional motor control, whereas (pre)-supplementary motor area lesions lead to impairments in implementing motor intentions (Brugger, Galovic, Weder, & Kägi, 2015 ; Nachev, Kennard, & Husain, 2008 ). Preclinical findings further show that photostimulation of GABAergic amygdala projections modulates extrinsic motivation without affecting intrinsically motivated behavior (Seo et al., 2016 ). Together, these findings suggest that intrinsic and extrinsic motivation reflect different cortico-striatal-limbic circuits.

Behavioral research primarily supports the view that intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are partially distinct, interacting processes. For example, if the motivation for intrinsic and extrinsic goals were independent constructs, they might demonstrate an additive or subtractive effect on each other (Woodworth, 1921 ). Indeed, the expectation (Liu & Hou, 2017 ) and experience (Badami, VaezMousavi, Wulf, & Namazizadeh, 2011 ) of an extrinsic reinforcer can increase intrinsic motivation. However, reports of the ‘undermining effect’, in which an external reinforcer reduces intrinsic motivation (Cerasoli, Nicklin, & Ford, 2014 ; Deci, 1971 ; Deci, Benware, & Landy, 1974 ; Lepper & Greene, 1978 ; Lepper, Greene, & Nisbett, 1973 ) have sparked debate over how extrinsic reinforcers affect internally-motived behaviors (Cameron & Pierce, 2002 ; Lamal, 2003 ; Lepper, Keavney, & Drake, 1996 ). One explanation for the undermining effect suggests that the presence of an external reinforcer shifts one's perception of the locus of control over the behavior from internal to external (Deci & Ryan, 1980 ). This implicates a key role of agency, or the belief of action ownership, in intrinsic motivation. While controversial, mounting evidence supports this account of the undermining effect, where various extrinsic motivators (e.g. food, social observation; Ryan, 1982 ) decrease intrinsic motivation when their delivery is contingent on task-performance.

A useful framework for parsing motivated action into intrinsic and extrinsic is the Rubicon model of action phases (Heckhausen & Heckhausen, 2018 ; Heckhausen, 1989 ). Within this framework, pre-decisional option deliberation occurs, which is followed by choice intention formation and planning, volitional action, outcome achievement, and evaluation ( Fig. 1 ). Husain and Roiser ( 2018 ) recently proposed a complementary model to deconstruct apathy and anhedonia into underlying cognitive processes, including option generation, anticipation, action initiation, prediction, consumption and learning. This parcellation broadly reflects the five main stages of the Rubicon model: (1) pre-decisional deliberation ( option generation ); (2) intention formation, planning, initiation ( anticipation ); (3) volitional action ( action initiation, prediction ), (4) outcome achievement ( consumption ); and (5) evaluation ( learning ; Figure 1 ). Within these overlapping frameworks, the initial pre-decisional deliberation/option generation phase represents the point at which intrinsic and extrinsic facets of motivation diverge, as early drivers of behavior can be intrinsic (e.g. enjoyment, interest, exploration) or extrinsic (e.g. social reward). The differences between these early drivers highlight a key distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, in which the former is a fundamentally proactive process and the latter reactive.

Schematic framework for parsing motivated action. Motivated decision-making and action is parsed into separate phases of choice, action and outcome valuation, combining and building upon separate frameworks including the Rubicon model of action phases, well-established computational mechanisms and a recent cognitive framework describing anhedonia and apathy. During choice valuation, pre-decisional deliberation includes option generation, a cost-benefit analysis and option selection. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation diverges during this early choice valuation phase. Once choice valuation has been computed and an option selected, planning and anticipation occurs. During action valuation, volitional action is initiated and action sustainment or acceleration is maintained. During outcome valuation, outcome achievement and consumption ensue, followed by evaluation based on learning via prediction error (PE) updating. Created with BioRender.com .

If a behavior were intrinsically motivated, the pre-decisional deliberation phase might be determined by biological drives, the need to restore homeostasis (Hebb, 1949 ; Hull, 1943 ), or a state of incongruency resolution (Festinger, 1957 ; Kagan, 1972 ) as described by early theories of intrinsic motivation. In contemporary frameworks, novelty-seeking, exploration, or interest in learning or achievement would render subsequent actions as intrinsically motivated. If a behavior were extrinsically motivated, this pre-decisional deliberation phase would represent the cost-benefit analysis in economic models, prediction-error minimization in reinforcement learning, or effort-reward trade-off computation. Under incentive motivation and behaviorist theories, the pre-decisional deliberation phase would be triggered by conditioned stimuli making conscious deliberation unnecessary and inefficient.

A combination of intrinsic and extrinsic factors likely enters into the pre-decisional deliberation phase to guide motivated behavior ( Fig. 1 ). Although intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are conceptually distinct processes, attempts to formally define them have identified several mechanisms by which they interact, leading to questions about their dissociability. Since they can interact in an additive or subtractive fashion, they may indeed be separate, independent drivers of behavior that are amalgamated during a pre-decisional deliberation phase of behavioral choice.

Measuring intrinsic motivation

Human behavior.

Early attempts to quantify intrinsic motivation were largely based on behavioral observation, wherein intrinsic motivation was measured as free choice of an activity in the absence of an external stimulus or performance rating (Butler & Nisan, 1986 ; Daniel & Esser, 1980 ; Liu & Hou, 2017 ). These studies also implemented self-report measures of participants' interest or enjoyment in an activity. While such measures do capture intrinsic motivation as inherent task enjoyment, they are limited by their qualitative and indirect nature, as well as by variability in participant insight. However, more objective measures are difficult to develop due to the inherently unobservable nature of intrinsic motivation.

Since spontaneous novelty-seeking and exploratory behavior reflect intrinsic motivation, one candidate objective measure may be the explore-exploit paradigm (Gittins & Jones, 1979 ; Robbins, 1952 ). In explore-exploit foraging tasks, participants must choose among various options and either exploit a previously reinforced choice or explore a novel alternative option. An individual's tendency to either explore an environment or exploit their pre-existing knowledge is influenced by perseverance (Von Culin et al., 2014 ), which acts as an indicator of confidence in the absence of immediate reward. Healthy adults flexibly employ a mix of exploitative and exploratory choices, where striatal and prefrontal dopamine signaling is proposed to drive exploration and exploitation, respectively (Badre, Doll, Long,, & Frank,, 2012 ; Daw, O'Doherty, Dayan, Seymour, & Dolan, 2006 ; Mansouri, Koechlin, Rosa, & Buckley, 2017 ). While these tasks capture one's willingness to trade-off exploratory v. exploitative behaviors, they do not measure free-choice exploratory behavior in the absence of explicit reinforcers, which would be most consistent with intrinsic motivation.

Paradigms that allow an individual to choose to explore an environment without extrinsic reinforcers, or to engage in a previously enjoyable or interesting activity, would more closely index intrinsic motivation. Additionally, outcomes that relate to achievement or autonomy, without socially rewarding feedback or monetary outcomes, would also putatively engage intrinsic motivation. Task parameters related to exploration, enjoyment, achievement, and autonomy can each be modulated and computationally modeled to determine their effects on free choice or behavioral activation vigor.

Current computational approaches depend on modeling decision-making, outcome learning, or action-outcome associations to drive our understanding of motivation. Traditional decision-making models often rely on softmax functions to compute values of available actions (Wilson & Collins, 2019 ), where action selection is based on the ‘policy’ of the best outcome. Computationally, an action selection process computes the probability of an action occurring in any state and the expected reward. A policy is developed based on the assumption that motivated actions are performed to increase the probability of rewards and decrease the probability of punishment. Yet, in everyday life, our actions can be motivated by an arbitrary cue that may signal an internal rewarding state. For example, a standard algorithm solving for motivated action assumes that all actions have equal probability, yet this discounts the unknown drivers and evaluators of internal rewards. Hence, they act as limiting factors to the applicability of decision-making models in studies of intrinsic motivation.

Neuroimaging

Functional neuroimaging [e.g., functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), electroencephalography (EEG)] offers a measurement modality that may be particularly apt for the study of internally driven processes like intrinsic motivation. Research using fMRI has characterized the neural correlates of various internal processes that lack clear behavioral indicators (e.g. rumination, emotion regulation, pain perception; Zhou et al., 2020 ; Wagner, N'Diaye, Ethofer, and Vuilleumier, 2011 ), yet few studies have assessed the neural correlates of intrinsic motivation in humans, which likely reflects the limitations in its behavioral measurement. Studies have largely assessed intrinsic motivation via comparisons with neural responses to extrinsic reinforcers during fMRI, which can be correlated with self-reported intrinsic motivation (Bengtsson, Lau, & Passingham, 2009 ; Chew et al., 2021 ; Linke et al., 2010 ). Despite the relative paucity of neuroimaging studies that clearly separate intrinsic v. extrinsic motivation, existing work provides preliminary insight into the neural circuitry of intrinsic motivation.

First, extrinsic reinforcers have elicited amygdala, ACC, ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC), orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), and ventral striatal (VS) or Nac activity in healthy subjects that was associated with higher self-reported extrinsic motivation but lower self-reported intrinsic motivation (Linke et al., 2010 ). This could suggest that intrinsic motivation relates to a lower sensitivity of these regions to extrinsic reinforcers, general deactivation of these regions, or that the dampening impact of extrinsic reinforcers on intrinsic motivation is subserved by these regions. Others report that intrinsic motivation (operationalized as the amount of free-time spent on a puzzle-task, which did not relate to task enjoyment, interest, or accuracy), was associated with deactivation in the amygdala, dorsal ACC, dorsomedial striatum, and insula during puzzle-task onset (Marsden et al., 2014 ). This is another piece of evidence linking neural deactivation to intrinsic motivation; however, since these tasks were not related to traditional ‘intrinsic motivators’ like task enjoyment, findings may relate to boredom-reduction behavior that might be more related to punishment avoidance rather than intrinsic motivation per se .

Bengtsson et al. ( 2009 ) operationalized intrinsic motivation as task-performance with and without explicit experimental observation during fMRI scanning, which boosted self-reported intrinsic motivation. The authors found greater neural activation of ACC, OFC, and lateral prefrontal cortex during task-performance errors when participants were observed (Bengtsson et al., 2009 ). While implicating a similar network of brain regions as prior studies, these findings cannot be divorced from error-related neural activation modulated by task salience (e.g. observed v. not).

In contrast, Murayama et al . ( 2010 ) provide a more optimal operationalization of intrinsic motivation, in which participants performed a task that was previously rated as inherently interesting, and successful task performance served as the intrinsic reward. During fMRI scanning, feedback for both extrinsic (monetary feedback) and intrinsic (accuracy feedback) rewards elicited VS activation. Participants then had the option to perform the same task without feedback, and intrinsic motivation was operationalized as time spent on the second version of the task. During the second session, VS activation was only diminished for extrinsic rewards, which could reflect reduced VS habituation to intrinsic rewards (Murayama et al., 2010 , 2015 ). Additionally, greater reductions in neural responses to extrinsic reinforcers were related to lower intrinsic motivation (i.e. task engagement time outside of the scanner), suggesting that neural habituation to extrinsic reinforcers may relate to lower intrinsic motivation. A recent computational neuroimaging study modeled intrinsic rewards as successful spatial-motor task performance without experienced errors, which was divorced from learning (Chew et al., 2021 ). This modeling of intrinsic rewards was akin to the accuracy feedback operationalization of Murayama et al . ( 2010 ). Both extrinsic (monetary) reward and intrinsic performance-based rewards (successful task completion) recruited vmPFC activation, which related to subjective happiness (Chew et al., 2021 ). Although limited in their ability to dissociate activation from task performance per se and explicit feedback related to achievement, these studies are the closest examples of objective measures of intrinsic motivation, and they suggest that putative reward-processing regions (VS, vmPFC) encode intrinsic rewards.

Complementary studies have examined how curiosity, or the intrinsic motivation to learn, modulates neural responses and influences memory recall (Gruber, Gelman, & Ranganath, 2014 ; Kang et al., 2009 ). High-curiosity states augment midbrain and v. activity (Gruber et al., 2014 ), as well as bilateral caudate (Kang et al., 2009 ) and anterior insula (Lee & Reeve, 2017 ) responses, which may improve learning and memory. As these paradigms index intrinsic motivation independently from a rewarding outcome, they perhaps provide the strongest support for partially overlapping circuits of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation.

The brain's dopamine system supports a range of appetitive and aversive motivational processes, including behavioral activation, exertion of effort, and sustained task engagement (Diederen & Fletcher, 2020 ; Salamone, Yohn, López-Cruz, San Miguel, & Correa, 2016 ). The mesolimbic pathway, projecting from the ventral tegmental area (VTA) to limbic regions, including the Nac, amygdala, and hippocampus, facilitates reinforcement and associative learning by acting as a ‘Go’ signal for foraging or exploration (Huang, Lv, & Wu, 2016 ). Although it has long been known that dopamine transmission subserves motivational processes, some evidence suggests that it is particularly important for intrinsic motivation. For example, mesolimbic dopamine contributes to exploration for the sake of interest (DeYoung, 2013 ; Panksepp & Moskal, 2008 ), and novel and unexpected stimuli elicit phasic dopamine spikes in rodents (Fiorillo, 2003 ; Hooks & Kalivas, 1994 ; Schultz, 1998 ). In patients with depression, deep-brain stimulation of dopaminergic brain regions including the Nac (Schlaepfer et al., 2007 ) and the mesolimbic dopamine projections from the VTA (Fenoy et al., 2018 ) increased subjective interest in, and motivational energy for, previously enjoyable activities (Schlaepfer et al., 2007 ). Dopamine has also been associated with intrinsically motivated flow states (de Manzano et al., 2013 ; Gyurkovics et al., 2016 ).

However, since VTA dopamine spiking is reduced for expected events (Schultz, 1998 ), it may not be a strong candidate neural mechanism for intrinsic motivation, which can occur for predictable activities. Efforts to reconcile the role of dopamine in learning and motivation suggest that while phasic cell firing signals RPEs (Kim et al., 2020 ), phasic dopamine release and local modulation in key regions, such as the VS/NAc, relates to approach motivation (Berke, 2018 ; Mohebi et al., 2019 ). Indeed, while VTA dopamine cell firing occurs during reward prediction, only NAc dopamine release covaries with reward availability and ramps up during approach and consumption of reward (Mohebi et al., 2019 ). Moreover, increasing dopamine in rodents increases their willingness to exert effort, and this has since been replicated across species, including via pharmacological manipulation in humans (Salamone, Correa, Farrar, & Mingote, 2007 ; Treadway & Zald, 2011 ). This suggests that, while VTA dopamine spiking underpins reward prediction and learning, it is local NAc dopamine release that encodes motivational drive.

Opioids, norepinephrine, and related neurotransmitter systems

Though a comprehensive account of the neurotransmitter systems subserving motivated behavior is beyond the scope of this review, we note that endogenous opioid and cannabinoid systems may uniquely modulate intrinsically motivated behavior. For example, mu- and delta-opioid receptor activation underlies the pleasurable effects of opioid and non-opioid drugs of abuse (Berrendero, Robledo, Trigo, Martín-García, & Maldonado, 2010 ; Trigo, Martin-García, Berrendero, Robledo, & Maldonado, 2010 ), as well as primary reinforcers (Hsu et al., 2013 ; Kelley & Berridge, 2002 ). Activation of mu-opioid receptors has also been shown to mediate motivational states following delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) administration in rodents (Ghozland et al., 2002 ), likely via interactions with the mesolimbic dopamine system. Further evidence implicates antidepressant effects of endogenous opioids in both animals and humans (Peciña et al., 2018 ), which many partly reflect improved intrinsic motivation (e.g. time mice spent swimming during the forced swim test; Kastin, Scollan, Ehrensing, Schally, and Coy, 1978 ). Additionally, the endocannabinoid system interacts with both endogenous opioid and dopaminergic systems to influence intrinsic motivation, such as social play (Trezza et al., 2012 ; Trezza & Vanderschuren, 2008 ), and voluntary exercise, in rodents (Dubreucq, Koehl, Abrous, Marsicano, & Chaouloff, 2010 ). Since these systems have been primarily examined in animal models, pharmacological manipulation in humans would be an important next step in delineating the contribution of opioid and endocannabinoid systems to intrinsic v. extrinsic motivation.

Intrinsic motivation and psychiatry: focus on anhedonia

Problems with motivation are observed across many neuropsychiatric disorders, and these often correspond to distinct symptoms ( Table 1 ). This section focuses on anhedonia, a reduced ability to experience pleasure (Ribot, 1986 ), as a prevalent clinical manifestation of deficient intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

Explicit studies of ‘intrinsic motivation’ in neuropsychiatric disorders

Note: Cohort abbreviations: AUD, alcohol use disorder; FEP, first-episode psychosis; MDD, major depressive disorder; PD, Parkinson's disease; SCZ, schizophrenia; SUDs, substance use disorders; SZA, schizoaffective disorder. Evidence abbreviations: EM, extrinsic motivation; IM, intrinsic motivation.

In the Diagnostic and Statistical Model of Mental Disorders, 5th edition (DSM- 5 ), anhedonia serves as one of two cardinal symptoms of depressive disorders, where it is defined as the ‘loss of interest or pleasure in all, or almost all, activities’, (American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ). The second cardinal symptom relates to persistent depressed mood. Approximately one-third of individuals with depression report clinically significant anhedonia (Pelizza & Ferrari, 2009 ), and these individuals are at-risk for poorer treatment outcomes, including nonresponse, relapse, and increased suicidality, relative to their non-anhedonic peers (Morris, Bylsma, & Rottenberg, 2009 ; Nierenberg et al., 1999 ).

Anhedonia remains an important clinical target that, by definition, implicates perturbations in intrinsically-motivated behavior, yet most empirical studies of anhedonia and motivation have investigated their relationship using extrinsic reinforcers. Findings broadly support theories of reward dysfunction in depression (reviewed by Sescousse, Caldú, Segura, and Dreher, 2013 ; Roiser & Husain, 2018; Borsini, Wallis, Zunszain, Pariante, and Kempton, 2020 ), where anhedonia has been associated with a reduced bias toward a monetary reward in individuals with depression (Liu et al., 2011 ) and their first-degree relatives (Liu et al., 2016 ). Children who are at-risk for depression show reduced VS and anterior insula responses to monetary gains, implicating blunted reward sensitivity as an antecedent to anhedonia (Luking, Pagliaccio, Luby, & Barch, 2016 ). Moreover, vmPFC responses during unexpected reward receipt may indirectly relate to anhedonia in depressed patients by modulating task motivation (Segarra et al., 2016 ). Interestingly, reward sensitivity disturbances in depression might not extend to aberrant reward learning (Huys, Pizzagalli, Bogdan, & Dayan, 2013 ) where adults with moderate depression show intact VS RPE-signaling during probabilistic learning (Rutledge et al., 2017 ). Nevertheless, there have been suggestions that perturbations in domains more related to intrinsic motivation, such as model-based future planning or effort initiation and invigoration, may be key in underlying anhedonia (Berwian et al., 2020 ; Cooper, Arulpragasam, & Treadway, 2018 ; Rutledge et al., 2017 ). Finally, affect can also alter both the valence and evaluation of an activity, which can, in turn, modulate the likelihood of selecting a more inherently interesting task (Isen & Reeve, 2006 ). Anhedonic individuals have more pessimistic likelihood estimates and reduced positive affective forecasts relative to controls while also demonstrating greater reliance on negative emotion during future-oriented cognition (Marroquín & Nolen-Hoeksema, 2015 ).

While few studies have implemented objective measures of intrinsic motivation in studying anhedonia, recent work links this symptom with difficulties with representations of future states during early stages of motivated behavior (Moutoussis et al., 2018 ). Since intrinsic motivation is driven more by proactive factors as opposed to the more reactive domain of extrinsic motivation, parsing future-oriented decision-making might provide novel insights not only into mechanisms of intrinsic motivation but also anhedonia. When considering the pre-decisional deliberation phase of motivated action ( Fig. 1 ), the representation of a future state may be critical for distinguishing intrinsic v. extrinsic motivation. For example, disrupted representations of intrinsic reinforcers (e.g. autonomy, achievement, task enjoyment, novelty seeking), energy expenditure (Treadway, Cooper, & Miller, 2019 ; Winch, Moberly, & Dickson, 2014 ), or fatigue (Müller, Klein-Flügge, Manohar, Husain, & Apps, 2021 ) might disrupt choice deliberation and interrupt ensuing stages of motivation. This could critically determine the capacity for self-generated, intrinsically-motivated actions (Husain & Roiser, 2018 ). However, relatively few studies have examined this distinction. One study developed a cognitive task that aimed to capture separate measures of self-generated ( intrinsic ) v. externally generated ( extrinsic ) motivation during the option-generation phase (Morris et al., 2020 ). This distinction linked self-generated option generation (intrinsic motivation) to anhedonia symptoms in healthy adults (Morris et al., 2020 ). However, this task still relies on extrinsic rewards, and there is a need for improved tasks that index both behavioral and neural correlates of intrinsic drivers of motivated behavior.

Summary and future directions

In this review, we summarize how intrinsic motivation has been conceptualized, measured, and related to neural function to elucidate its role in psychopathology. In contrast to extrinsic motivation, which has been rapidly incorporated into prominent cognitive, computational, and neurobiological models of human behavior, knowledge of intrinsic motivation remains limited due to evolving conceptualizations, imprecise measurement, and incomplete characterization of its biological correlates. We identify three potential areas of interest for future research.

First, additional objective measures of intrinsically motivation should be developed. This remains challenging experimentally since even the closest approximations of intrinsic motivation (Murayama et al., 2010 ; Rutledge et al., 2017 ) define the construct relative to extrinsic motivation, and other paradigms (e.g. exploration/exploitation tasks) rely on the presence of extrinsic reinforcers. Rather than defining motivated behavior as intrinsic or extrinsic, a more tractable approach might be to consider separate drivers of behavior that can be intrinsic or extrinsic. Future paradigms could index intrinsic motivation by characterizing the effects of intrinsic v. extrinsic reinforcers on motivation for an activity that is enjoyable. Such a design would enable more complex modeling of the effects of distinct reinforcers, and interactions between them, on motivated behavior, which would resolve inconsistencies surrounding the impact of extrinsic reinforcers on intrinsic motivation. For example, monetary incentives might reduce motivation only when a perceived agency is low, or when task enjoyment is high. These interactions might explain paradoxical observations like the undermining effect.

Second, computational models are needed to characterize intrinsic motivation. Computational models of motivation have been successfully implemented in studies of extrinsic motivation, yet few are appropriate for intrinsic motivation due to a focus on action-outcome associations. However, if the intrinsic reward were operationalized as a measurable outcome (e.g. completion of an enjoyable task), reinforcement-learning models could estimate how intrinsic reward value is represented. Advancements in the computational area could significantly improve understanding of the latent processes underlying (ab)normal decision-making, thereby identifying novel therapeutic targets.

Third, although evidence supports the bifurcation of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation at the psychological level, findings at the neural level are more equivocal. Given the overarching role of the mesolimbic dopamine system in learning, reward value estimation, and exploratory behavior, it is perhaps unsurprising that current evidence supports largely overlapping neural circuits for intrinsically and extrinsically motivated behavior. One potential avenue involves targeted pharmacological manipulations or neuromodulation of cortico-limbic circuits to determine if intrinsically and extrinsically motivated behaviors can be systematically modulated in humans. By elucidating the neural circuits of distinct motivational processes and their associations with specific symptom profiles, this approach would improve targeted interventions for highly heterogenous and debilitating disorders like depression.

Financial support

All authors report no financial disclosures. This work was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health (LSM, grant number K01MH120433) and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (MLW, T32DA022975).

What Do the Case Studies Tell Us About Motivation?

• First Online: 09 March 2016

Cite this chapter

• Maggie Hartnett 2  

3017 Accesses

This chapter discusses and synthesises the key findings across the two cases reported in chapter three both in terms of the motivation of learners and the ways in which certain social and contextual influences supported or hindered the expression of different types of motivation. The concepts of autonomy, competence and relatedness, from self-determination theory, are used as lenses to show how the identified social and contextual influences either supported or undermined learners’ psychological needs and, consequently, their motivation. Important commonalities as well as differences, between the two cases, are explored and discussed. Attention is also drawn to how these findings extend and build on the existing body of research on motivation in online education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Anderson, B. (2006a). Writing power into online discussion. Computers and Composition, 23 (1), 108–124. doi: 10.1016/j.compcom.2005.12.007 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Anderson, B., & Simpson, M. (2004). Group and class contexts for learning and support online: Learning and affective support in small group and class contexts. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5 (3), Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/index .

Anderson, T. (2006b). Interaction in learning and teaching on the educational semantic web. In C. Juwah (Ed.), Interactions in online education: Implications for theory and practice (pp. 141–155). London: Routledge.

Google Scholar  

Anderson, T. (2008). Teaching in an online context. In T. Anderson (Ed.), Theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed., pp. 343–366). Retrieved from http://www.aupress.ca/index.php/books/120146 .

Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5 (2).

Andresen, M. A. (2009). Asynchronous discussion forums: Success factors, outcomes, assessments, and limitations. Educational Technology and Society, 12 (1), 249–257. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/12_1/19.pdf .

Artino, A. R. (2007). Online military training: Using a social cognitive view of motivation and self-regulation to understand students’ satisfaction, perceived learning, and choice. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8 (3), 191–202.

Artino, A. R. (2008). Motivational beliefs and perceptions of instructional quality: Predicting satisfaction with online training. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 24 (3), 260–270. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00258.x .

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control . New York: Freeman.

Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9 (3), 75–78. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00064 .

Baynton, M. (1992). Dimensions of “control” in distance education: A factor analysis. The American Journal of Distance Education, 6 (2), 17–31. doi: 10.1080/08923649209526783 .

Bekele, T. A. (2010). Motivation and satisfaction in internet-supported learning environments: A review. Educational Technology and Society, 13 (2), 116–127.

Blumenfeld, P. C., Kempler, T. M., & Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in learning environments. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 475–488). Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Brophy, J. (2008). Developing students’ appreciation for what is taught in school. Educational Psychologist, 43 (3), 132–141. doi: 10.1080/00461520701756511 .

Brophy, J. (2010). Motivating students to learn (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Cheung, W. S., Hew, K. F., & Ling Ng, C. S. (2008). Toward an understanding of why students contribute in asynchronous online discussions. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38 (1), 29–50. doi: 10.2190/EC.38.1.b .

Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. R. Gunnar & L. A. Sroufe (Eds.), Self processes and development: The Minnesota symposia on child development (Vol. 23, pp. 43–77). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1985). Emergent motivation and the evolution of the self. In D. A. Kleiber & M. L. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 4, pp. 93–119). Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.

Cutler, R. (1995). Distributed presence and community in cyberspace. Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century, 3 (2), 12–32.

Deci, E. L., & Moller, A. C. (2005). The concept of competence: A starting place for understanding intrinsic motivation and self-determined extrinsic motivation. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 579–597). New York: The Guilford Press.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11 (4), 227–268. doi: 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 .

Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26 (3/4), 325–346. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep2603&4_6 .

Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by “collaborative learning”? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 1–16). Amsterdam: Pergamon.

Dron, J. (2007). Control and constraint in e-learning: Choosing when to choose . Hershey, PA: Information Science.

Book   Google Scholar  

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2 (2), 87–105. doi: 10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6 .

Garrison, D. R., & Baynton, M. (1987). Beyond independence in distance education: The concept of control. The American Journal of Distance Education, 1 (3), 3–15. doi: 10.1080/08923648709526593 .

Ginsberg, M. B. (2005). Cultural diversity, motivation, and differentiation. Theory into practice, 44 (3), 218–225. doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip4403_6 .

Ginsberg, M. B., & Wlodkowski, R. J. (2000). Creating highly motivated classrooms for all students: A schoolwide approach to powerful teaching with diverse learners . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hidi, S. (2000). An interest researcher’s perspective: The effects of extrinsic and intrinsic factors on motivation. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 309–339). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Hidi, S., & Ainley, M. (2008). Interest and self-regulation: Relationships between two variables that influence learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 77–109). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41 (2), 111–127. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4 .

Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Nagarajan, A., & Derry, S. J. (2006). From face-to-face to online participation: Tensions in facilitating problem-based learning. In M. Savin-Baden & K. Wilkie (Eds.), Problem-based learning online (pp. 61–78). Maidenhead, Berkshire, England: Open University Press.

Hodgins, H. S., Koestner, R., & Duncan, N. (1996). On the compatibility of autonomy and relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22 (3), 227–237. doi: 10.1177/0146167296223001 .

Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102 (3), 588–600. doi: 10.1037/a0019682 .

Jones, A., & Issroff, K. (2007). Learning technologies: Affective and social issues. In G. Conole & M. Oliver (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives in e-learning research: Themes, methods and impact on practice (pp. 190–202). London: Routledge.

Juwah, C. (2006). Interactions in online peer learning. In C. Juwah (Ed.), Interactions in online education (pp. 171–190). London: Routledge.

Katz, I., & Assor, A. (2007). When choice motivates and when it does not. Educational Psychology Review, 19 (4), 429–442. doi: 10.1007/s10648-006-9027-y .

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41 (2), 75–86. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1 .

Kortemeyer, G. (2006). An analysis of asynchronous online homework discussions in introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 74 (6), 526–536. doi: 10.1119/1.2186684 .

Krapp, A. (2002). An educational-psychological theory of interest and its relation to SDT. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Determination research (pp. 405–427). Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press.

Kuo, Y. C., Walker, A. E., Belland, B. R., & Schroder, K. E. E. (2013). A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14 (1), 16–39.

Lee, Y., Choi, J., & Kim, T. (2013). Discriminating factors between completers of and dropouts from online learning courses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44 (2), 328–337. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01306.x .

Lin, Y.-M., Lin, G.-Y., & Laffey, J. M. (2008). Building a social and motivational framework for understanding satisfaction in online learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38 (1), 1–27. doi: 10.2190/EC.38.1.a .

Lindgren, R., & McDaniel, R. (2012). Transforming online learning through narrative and student agency. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 15 (4), 344–355.

Loyens, S. M. M., Kirschner, P. A., & Paas, F. (2011). Problem-based learning. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, T. T. Urdan, A. G. Bus, S. Major & H. Swanson (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook: Application to learning and teaching (Vol. 3, pp. 403–425). Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Martens, R. L., Gulikers, J., & Bastiaens, T. (2004). The impact of intrinsic motivation on e-learning in authentic computer tasks. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 20 (5), 368–376. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00096.x .

Martens, R. L., & Kirschner, P. A. (2004). Predicting intrinsic motivation. Association for Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 621–630). Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

Mayes, T. (2006). Theoretical perspectives on interactivity in e-learning. In C. Juwah (Ed.), Interactions in online education (pp. 9–26). London: Routledge.

Moore, M. G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 23–38). London: Routledge.

Moore, M. G. (2007). The theory of transactional distance. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (2nd ed., pp. 89–108). Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view of online learning (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth; Cengage Learning.

Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2008). Exploring the fluctuation of motivation and use of self-regulatory processes during learning with hypermedia. Instructional Science, 36 (3), 203–231. doi: 10.1007/s11251-007-9028-3 .

Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2009). Learning with computer-based learning environments: A literature review of computer self-efficacy. Review of Educational Research, 79 (2), 576–600. doi: 10.3102/0034654308326083 .

Paris, S. G., & Turner, J. C. (1994). Situated motivation. In P. R. Pintrich, D. R. Brown & C. E. Weinstein (Eds.), Student motivation, cognition, and learning: Essays in honor of Wilbert J. McKeachie (pp. 213–237). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Park, J.-H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. Educational Technology and Society, 12 (4), 207–217. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/ .

Payne, B. K., Monk-Turner, E., Smith, D., & Sumter, M. (2006). Improving group work: Voices of students. Education, 126 (3), 441–448.

Reeve, J. (1996). Motivating others: Nurturing inner motivational resources . Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Reeve, J. (2002). Self-determination theory applied to educational settings. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Determination research (pp. 183–203). Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press.

Reeve, J. (2006). Teachers as facilitators: What autonomy-supportive teachers do and why their students benefit. The Elementary School Journal, 106 (3), 225–236. doi: 10.1086/501484 .

Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44 (3), 159–175. doi: 10.1080/00461520903028990 .

Reeve, J., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Self-determination theory: A dialectical framework for understanding sociocultural influences on student motivation. In D. M. McInerney & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Research on sociocultural influences on motivation and learning: Big theories revisited (Vol. 4, pp. 31–60). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

Reeve, J., Jang, H., Hardre, P., & Omura, M. (2002). Providing a rationale in an autonomy-supportive way as a strategy to motivate others during an uninteresting activity. Motivation and Emotion, 26 (3), 183–207. doi: 10.1023/A:1021711629417 .

Reeve, J., Nix, G., & Hamm, D. (2003). Testing models of the experience of self-determination in intrinsic motivation and the conundrum of choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95 (2), 375–392. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.375 .

Reeve, J., Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., & Jang, H. (2008). Understanding and promoting autonomous self-regulation: A self-determination theory perspective. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 223–244). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Renninger, K. A., Cai, M., Lewis, M., Adams, M., & Ernst, K. (2011). Motivation and learning in an online, unmoderated, mathematics workshop for teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59 (2), 229–247. doi: 10.1007/s11423-011-9195-4 .

Rentroia-Bonito, M. A., Jorge, J., & Ghaoui, C. (2006). Motivation to e-learn within organizational settings: An exploratory factor structure. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 4 (3), 24–35.

Rienties, B., Giesbers, B., Tempelaar, D., Lygo-Baker, S., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2012). The role of scaffolding and motivation in CSCL. Computers and Education, 59 (3), 893–906. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.010 .

Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D., Van den Bossche, P., Gijselaers, W., & Segers, M. (2009). The role of academic motivation in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 25 (6), 1195–1206. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2009.05.012 .

Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in asynchronous, text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14 (2), 50–71.

Rovai, A. P. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. The Internet and Higher Education, 10 (1), 77–88. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.10.001 .

Rovai, A. P., & Lucking, R. (2003). Sense of community in a higher education television-based distance education program. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51 (2), 5–16. doi: 10.1007/BF02504523 .

Rovai, A. P., Ponton, M., Wighting, M. J., & Baker, J. (2007). A comparative analysis of student motivation in traditional classroom and e-learning courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 6 (3), 413–432.

Schunk, D. H., Meece, J. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (2014). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Shen, D., Cho, M.-H., Tsai, C.-L., & Marra, R. (2013). Unpacking online learning experiences: Online learning self-efficacy and learning satisfaction. The Internet and Higher Education, 19 , 10–17. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.04.001 .

Shroff, R. H., & Vogel, D. R. (2009). Assessing the factors deemed to support individual student intrinsic motivation in technology supported online and face-to-face discussions. Journal of Information Technology Education, 8 , 59–85.

Shroff, R. H., Vogel, D. R., & Coombes, J. (2008). Assessing individual-level factors supporting student intrinsic motivation in online discussions: A qualitative study. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19 (1), 111–125.

Slavin, R. E. (2011). Classroom applications of cooperative learning. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, T. T. Urdan, A. G. Bus, S. Major & H. Swanson (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook: Application to learning and teaching (Vol. 3, pp. 359–378). Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Swan, K., & Shea, P. (2005). The development of virtual learning communities. In S. Hiltz & R. Goldman (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous learning networks (pp. 239–260). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Van Etten, S., Pressley, M., McInerney, D. M., & Liem, A. D. (2008). College seniors’ theory of their academic motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100 (4), 812–828. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.100.4.812 .

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind and Society: The development of higher psychological processes . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wang, S.-L., & Lin, S. S. J. (2007a). The application of social cognitive theory to web-based learning through NetPorts. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38 (4), 600–612. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00645.x .

Wang, S.-L., & Lin, S. S. J. (2007b). The effects of group composition of self-efficacy and collective efficacy on computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 23 (5), 2256–2268. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2006.03.005 .

Wang, S.-L., & Wu, P.-Y. (2008). The role of feedback and self-efficacy on web-based learning: The social cognitive perspective. Computers and Education, 51 (4), 1589–1598. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.03.004 .

Wighting, M. J., Liu, J., & Rovai, A. P. (2008). Distinguishing sense of community and motivation characteristics between online and traditional college students. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9 (3), 285–295.

Xie, K., DeBacker, T. K., & Ferguson, C. (2006). Extending the traditional classroom through online discussion: The role of student motivation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34 (1), 67–89. doi: 10.2190/7BAK-EGAH-3MH1-K7C6 .

Yukselturk, E., & Bulut, S. (2007). Predictors for student success in an online course. Educational Technology and Society, 10 (2), 71–83. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/ .

Zaharias, P., & Poylymenakou, A. (2009). Developing a usability evaluation method for e-learning applications: Beyond functional usability. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 25 (1), 75–98. doi: 10.1080/10447310802546716 .

Zepke, N., Leach, L., & Butler, P. (2009). The role of teacher-student interactions in tertiary student engagement. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 44 (1), 69–82.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand

Maggie Hartnett

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maggie Hartnett .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Hartnett, M. (2016). What Do the Case Studies Tell Us About Motivation?. In: Motivation in Online Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0700-2_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0700-2_4

Published : 09 March 2016

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-10-0698-2

Online ISBN : 978-981-10-0700-2

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Blanchard LeaderChat

A forum to discuss leadership and management issues, a mini case study on motivation.

On his first day back after his training, the plant manager noticed a Technical Service Executive in the lab having a discussion with an external contractor. While she was wearing safety glasses, the contractor was not. The manager has a no tolerance policy as far as safety is concerned and his normal response would be to call the technician to his office and in his words, “read her the riot act.”

According to the manager’s self-assessment: “I am known to blow a fuse (or two) when safety rules are flouted, however, I managed to keep my cool and decided to test my training.”

He asked the technician to his office and could see that she was worried about his reaction. But instead of leading with his dismay and disappointment, he started by explaining that he had just received some training on motivation. He shared key concepts with her. He then asked her if she thought that the rule to wear safety glasses, even when there was no experiment on, was “stupid” as there is no danger to the eyes. Did she feel imposed upon to wear safety glasses as she had no choice?

Since the technician was invited to have a discussion rather than “dressing down,” she was open and candid. She explained that she had a two-year old child and she was extremely concerned about lab safety as she wanted to reach home safe every evening. To the manager’s great surprise, she also shared that in certain areas, she would prefer even more, not less, stringent safety measures. For example, she suggested that safety shoes should be required for lab experiments that are conducted at elevated temperatures.

But when it came to wearing safety glasses when no experiments were being conducted, she just could not understand the rationale and did, indeed, resent the imposed rule. As a result, she didn’t feel compelled to enforce it, especially with an external contractor. The manager said he understood her feelings and went on to provide the rationale that the intention was that wearing glasses would become a force of habit, just like wearing a safety belt in the car.

The manager said he saw the light dawn in her eyes.

When it comes to your leadership and the motivation of those you lead, consider:

1. Self-regulation is a requirement if you want to lead differently—and better. Challenging your natural tendencies and patterns of behavior provides you with more options on how to lead. The new choices you make can be rewarding and productive for you, but especially for those you lead. As the plant manager reported: “I am sure if I had just followed my normal instincts and given her a piece of my mind, I would have been met with a hangdog look, profuse apologies, and a promise not to ever do this again. And it probably would have happened again. She would have gone away from my office with feelings of resentment and being imposed upon and I would also have had a disturbed day due to all the negative energy.”

2.  Admit when you are trying something new. Be honest about expanding your leadership skills. People will appreciate your sincere and authentic efforts. Says the plant manager: “Suffice it to say that in my view, my little experiment was a success. I have since shared what I learned with many of my team members and plan to have more Motivational Outlook Conversations with them in the coming weeks.”

3.  Remember that as a manager you cannot motivate anyone. What you can do is create an environment where an individual is more likely to be optimally motivated. Ask (and genuinely care about) how a person is feeling, help them recognize their own sense of well-being regarding a particular issue, and provide them with rationale without trying to “sell” it.

Other take-aways? Please share!

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

About the author:

Susan Fowler is one of the principal authors—together  with David Facer and Drea Zigarmi—of The Ken Blanchard Companies’ new  Optimal Motivation  process and workshop.  Their posts appear on the first and third Monday of each month.

Via @leaderchat Share this:

Related posts.

Accountability Issue with a Team Member? Ask Madeleine

Creating a Culture of Accountability

Colleague Dropping the Ball? Manager Won’t Help? Ask Madeleine

11 thoughts on “ a mini case study on motivation ”.

I’d add “Remember to listen to your team as they have a desire to be heard.” It’s motivating to know that you’ve been heard out by management and your thoughts were considered.

Wow this article hits home in so many ways. The thing I struggle most with is my natural tendencies to react without thinking as a manager. I was told in an impromptu conversation that I am not aware of the way I speak to people which is often very hostile. My boss gave me the best advice saying ‘write as if you were writing to your second favourite person in the world’, not the first because you may be too casual in your response. Self-regulation is indeed a requirement and we as managers cannot plead ignorance.

Pingback: A Mini Case Study on Motivation | People Discovery

Pingback: SXSW is here! Association Weekly Wrap-Up for March 8th! « YourMembership.com YourMembership.com

Pingback: A Mini Case Study on Motivation | the Change Samurai

Pingback: “Remember: As a Manager, You Cannot Motivate Anyone” - RecognizeThis! Blog

Pingback: “Remember: As a Manager, You Cannot Motivate Anyone” - DerekIrvineGloboforce - Member Blogs - HR Blogs - HR Space from Personnel Today and Xpert HR

Pingback: “Remember – As a Manager, You Cannot Motivate Anyone”

Thanks for sharing, gonna put this in practice.

Nice i like it

[email protected]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Discover more from blanchard leaderchat.

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

Consulte los artículos y contenidos publicados en éste medio, además de los e-sumarios de las revistas científicas en el mismo momento de publicación

Esté informado en todo momento gracias a las alertas y novedades

Acceda a promociones exclusivas en suscripciones, lanzamientos y cursos acreditados

Estamos experimentado problemas con el acceso a las cuentas de usuarios. Disculpe la molestias

• I have forgotten my password

Tékhne has signed on with a new publisher, Sciendo, please visit https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/tekhne/tekhne-overview.xml for more information. Tékhne - Review of Applied Management Studies is a journal property of the Polytechnic Institute of Cávado and Ave, which aims to publish original articles in various areas of management, including accounting and auditing, management control, taxation, finance, strategy and marketing, organizational behavior, management information systems and law. The journal aims to provide a forum for publication and dissemination of scientific research conducted in the fields of management, as well as promote the interconnection of academic research with practical reality. It is intended to disseminate the scientific results obtained by academics and professionals, both nationally or internationally. The journal is based on a process of double blind review.

Indexed in:

ScienceDirect

• Jel classification
• Introduction
• Literature review
• Theories of motivation
• Measures of motivation at work
• Smes leader and smes excellence: criteria for its classification
• Brief description of the methods of data collection
• Discussion of results
• Bibliography

This study intends to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the motivation of the employees of three Portuguese Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) with the statutes of Excellence, Leader and both statutes. These statutes were assigned by the Institute for Support to Small and Medium Enterprises and Innovation. A questionnaire was applied in 2016 based on the Multi-Factorial Scale and a brief interview with the managers of these Portuguese companies was conducted. It was found that the dimensions “work organization” and “commitment” presented lower results in the three companies, while the other dimensions had higher ones in terms of motivation at work. Only in the “performance” dimension were there significant differences in motivation at work that occurred between SME Leader and SME Excellence. It should be noted that, according to the results obtained, both in the opinion of managers and employees, the statutes did not contribute to motivation at work.

Over the years, motivation at work has been presented as a central variable in organizational life. It is an essential variable that contributes to the employee acting in a certain way, since it is related to their good performance and to achieve goals ( Howard, Gagné, Morin, & Broeck, 2016; Kanfer, Frese, & Johnson, 2017 ).

The word motivation derives from the Latin movere , meaning “to move,” that is, the movement that leads to action ( Steers, Mowday, & Shapiro, 2004 ).

For Pinder (2008) , motivation is understood as an energetic set of forces of the individual, which relate to the work behavior and determine its form, direction, intensity and duration, that is, motivation at work results from the interaction between the person and the environment, since it is a central concept in the context of organizational behavior.

Chiavenato (2010: p. 242) states that it is “a basic psychological process. Along with perception, attitudes, personalities and learning, motivation stands out as an important process in understanding human behavior. It interacts and acts in conjunction with other mediating processes and the environment. As with cognitive processes, motivation cannot be visualized.”

Subsequently, Ferreira, Neves, and Caetano (2011) define this concept as the equivalent of the desire to adopt high levels of effort in order to achieve organizational goals, provided that such efforts lead to the satisfaction of some individual need.

People take into consideration more than monetary reward or personal interests at work, since it does not constitute a cost to workers. They prefer to get involved in meaningful work, considered rewarding and useful, and feel rewarded in their work, which stimulates the continuity of work behaviors, generating positive emotions ( Thomas, 2009 ).

In sum, according to Gibson, Ivancevich, Donnelly, and Konopaske (2012) , the concept of motivation leads to several conclusions, that is, today theorists have slightly different interpretations, with emphasis on the different factors; the concept of motivation is closely related to the behavior and performance of workers; motivation certainly involves goals and objectives; results from events and processes that are internal or external to the worker; and finally, research on motivation is still evolving, and many aspects of human motivation are still unexplained.

According to Pritchard, Harrell, DiazGranados, and Guzman (2008) , establishing goals and the visibility of the efforts made to recognize the usefulness of their work are also important factors for workers and have a motivating effect. Thus, workers feel motivated for a given task resulting from needs, stimuli, interests, expectations, and thus can refer to two types of motivation: the intrinsic and the extrinsic.

It is understood by intrinsic motivation, situations in which rewards are not necessarily given, that is, it is related to the tasks that satisfy the worker alone; corresponding to internal goals ( Arias, 2004 ).

This type of motivation can also be called personal or unconscious motivation, that is, it is motivation that comes from the worker himself and is driven by the interest or pleasure of the task itself, not depending on any type of external pressure ( Salanova & Kirmaen, 2010 ).

On the other hand, according to Tapia (1997) , extrinsic motivation is related to external goals, that is, situations in which behavior results from the purpose of only receiving a reward or avoiding any kind of punishment. In these situations, the worker is mainly concerned with his image, since the external environment influences the control of behavior, not the motivational factors inherent neither to the worker nor to the task, but only the result of the interaction between both.

Since the 1950s several theories and much relevant research on human motivation have been developed. According to Neves (1998) , it is fundamental to understand human behavior, hence the multiplicity of theories that deal with motivation, mainly in the search for the reason behind individual actions.

The main objective of this study is to assess the antecedents that explain the motivation of the employees of the three organizations and to evaluate if the statute obtained had an influence on motivation, improvements in working conditions, increase in productivity and performance and public recognition. To attain this purpose, a questionnaire was applied to a sample of 216 employees of three Portuguese companies in 2016.

This paper is organized as followed. In the second section, the main theories of motivation, the most commonly used measures of motivation and the criteria used to assign the statutes are presented. The methodology is described in the third section, while the estimated results are reported and discussed in the fourth section.

The various motivation theories have different points of view ( Ferreira & Martinez, 2008 ). Thus, motivation theories are classified according to two major groups: content theories and process theories. The former seek to explain motivation through the analysis of motivational factors, focusing on the question: “what motivates the workers”, that is, explains the human motivation from the needs of the individual, stating that the conduct is oriented to their satisfaction. Process theories analyze motivation in a more dynamic way, seeking above all to answer the questions: “how motivated behavior takes place”, “how motivation is created and sustained in the long run”, understand motivation as a decision-making process, in which perceptions, objectives, expectations and personal goals are at stake ( Cunha, Rego, Cunha, Cabral-Cardoso, & Neves, 2014 ).

There are indeed many theories about motivation at work. The theoretical framework of this study was limited to the use of some of the most important theories of motivation, which are explained below.

In 1961, McClelland developed a theory focused on acquired needs, that is, “the needs that people develop through their experience, throughout their lives, that is, the needs acquired socially as they interact with their environment” ( Teixeira, 2005 : p. 150). This theory reports on three basic motives or needs in the dynamics of human behavior, namely ( McClelland, 1961 ): needs of achievement, power needs and needs of affiliation.

According to a study by McClelland, with a base of more than five hundred managers, “the most effective managers have a great need for power, a more moderate need for accomplishment and a less need for a friendly relationship” ( Teixeira, 2005 : p. 151).

Variety: degree in which the function requires the use of skills, activities, diversified knowledge, talents and different skills on the part of the worker in order for the work to be carried out.

Identity: the degree to which the function requires the execution of an identifiable work unit, with principle and purpose and that produces a visible result, that is, allows the worker to identify with what he produced.

Meaning: impact of work on the lives of others, either in the organization itself or in the external environment. The greater the impact, the greater the meaning of work.

Autonomy: it represents the level of independence in the planning of work and its execution, that is, the degree to which the work provides freedom and that allows the worker to plan the work itself and the procedures to be used for it to be carried out.

Feedback: refers to the quantity and quality of the information received on the progress in the execution of the work and the levels of performance achieved.

Locke and Latham developed Goal Setting Theory in 1968, which argues that the best way to increase employee productivity is by defining or setting goals or goals and controlling their outcomes, once objectives are established, one can motivate the person within the organization ( Locke & Latham, 1990 ).

S for specific, the objectives must be specific, easy to understand and well defined so that its implementation is viable;

M for measurable, the objectives must be measurable, it must be possible to quantify them, see their evolution, so that they can make changes. The agreed, but also attainable, goals should be achievable, however does not mean that they have to be easy, but also cannot be impossible, as it can cause frustration and discouragement;

R for realistic, realistic objectives must be defined, but they must be feasible;

T for timed, the objectives must be achieved in a certain period of time, a deadline must be set for them to be achieved.

However, according to Cunha et al. (2014) , there is criticism toward Locke and Latham's theory. The first criticism refers to the fact that people focus on their goals and can jeopardize interpersonal relationships and cooperation, neglecting cooperative aids that may delay their achievement. The second criticism concerns the possibility that the workers do not have sufficient capacity to achieve the objectives, which cancels the motivating effects.

In short, this theory suggests that performance differences between individuals performing a task for which they have the necessary skills and knowledge are mainly due to the different performance objectives of each.

The Multi-Factor Motivation Scale at Work also evaluates Allen and Meyer's Three-Dimensional Model, it approaches the employee's commitment to the organization, since it is a determinant measure of productivity, associated as an element that contributes strongly to motivation at work ( Allen & Meyer, 1990 ).

Affective: concerns the identification, involvement and emotional attachment of the worker to the organization.

Instrumental: refers to the importance of the costs inherent in leaving the organizations, that is, workers remain in the organization because they need to do so.

Normative: it is reflected in the feeling of “obligation” to continue in the organization, that is, workers committed to the organization expose certain behaviors because they believe to be the most morally correct.

Commitment is a measure that determines productivity and contributes to motivation at work, since organizations need people who are committed and prepared to participate in decision-making ( Allen & Meyer, 1991 ).

The various studies on motivation at work show how important it is for managers to understand why their employees are motivated or demotivated. Therefore, there are some measures that managers can access to assess the behavior of individuals, such as motivation at work, Job Diagnostic Survey by Hackman and Oldham (1974) and the Multi-Moti Multi-Factor Motivation Scale in the Work of Ferreira, Diogo, Ferreira, and Valente (2006) .

The Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS), developed by Hackman and Oldham (1974) , covers 5 dimensions: meaning, variety, identity, autonomy and feedback.

According to Hackman and Oldham (1974) , the questionnaire helps determine how work can best be designed by obtaining information about how people react to different types of jobs. This questionnaire measures the various characteristics of the work, the reactions of the interviewees in relation to their jobs and the need for growth of the interviewees. The questionnaire is divided into 7 sections. The questions are designed to get perceptions of the individual's work and their reactions to it.

Ferreira et al. (2006) created the Multi-Factor Motivation Scale at Work with the objective of making and developing a psychological assessment tool that measures motivation at work, based on some classic theories of motivation: the Hackman and Oldham Function Character Model, McClelland's Acquired Needs Theory, Locke's and Latham's Goal-Setting Theory, and Allen-Meyer's Three-Dimensional Model.

The scale includes 28 items resulting from a theoretical research. These items evaluate four dimensions related to work motivation, that is, work organization, performance, reasons of accomplishment and power and involvement in the organization ( Ferreira et al., 2006 ).

According to the Institute for Support to Small and Medium-sized Enterprises and Innovation (IAPMEI), Micro, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) are those companies that cumulatively meet the requirements regarding number of employees and turnover.

Thus, a company is classified as a small enterprise if it has less than 50 employees and a turnover or total balance of 10 million euros or less and, finally, an average enterprise if it has less than 250 employees and a turnover equal to or less than EUR 50 million and a balance sheet total of EUR 43 million or less ( IAPMEI, 2007 ).

Companies providing SMEs status, in accordance with the Community Recommendation of 6 May 2003 (2003/361/EC), to be proved by obtaining the online SME Certification, which must be renewed annually to date legal limit of presentation of the Simplified Business Information (IES) to the Tax Authority, under penalty of automatic expiration;

SMEs that have completed at least three full years of activity and have closed accounts for 2015;

Have a regularized situation before the Tax Authority, Social Security, IAPMEI and Tourism of Portugal;

SMEs that pursue growth strategies and strengthen their competitive base, selected through the superior capacity of scrutiny of a wide implantation in the national territory, by the registered banks;

SMEs that have a rating assigned by the Bank's internal credit rating system that proposes the application, consistent with the superior scrutiny capacity required above;

Positive Net Profit in 2015;

Positive EBITDA over the two years under review (2015 and 2014);

Financial Autonomy in 2015 ≥ 30% (Equity/Assets);

Net Return on Shareholders’ Equity ≥ 1% (Net Result/Equity);

Net Debt/EBITDA ≤ 5% (Net Debt/EBITDA);

EBITDA/Assets ≥ 1%;

EBITDA/Turnover ≥ 1%;

Turnover in 2015 ≥ 1,000,000.00 (1 million euros);

Number of employees (AWU) of the company as self-employed in 2015 ≥ 8.

Financial Autonomy in 2015 ≥ 137.5% (Equity/Assets);

Net Return on Shareholders’ Equity ≥ 12.5% (Net Result/Equity);

Net Debt/EBITDA ≤ 2.5% (Net Debt/EBITDA);

EBITDA/Assets ≥ 10%;

EBITDA/Turnover ≥ 7.5%;

Growth in Turnover ≥ 0%.

To determine the level of importance attributed to the “Organization at Work” dimension, according to Hackman and Oldham's theory, to the Realization and Power dimension “according to McClelland's theory, to the” Performance “dimension, according to Locke and Latham's theory, to “Commitment” dimension, according to Allen and Meyer's theory;

Identify if there are changes in the behavior of employees, after obtaining status, motivation, productivity, performance, improvement of working conditions, and the degree of importance that the public recognition brought to companies;

Determine, from the manager's point of view, whether there are significant differences after the attribution of the SMEs Excellence, SMEs Leader or both status in the motivation of the employees and has influenced the quality of the products and/or services provided.

Thus, the Multi-Moti Scale of Ferreira et al. (2006) , since it is a validated measure in a Portuguese sample and based on the work of Hackman and Oldham, McClelland, Latham and Locke and Allen and Meyer.

For the development of this study, in a quantitative perspective, and taking into account that motivation at work stands out as an important process in the understanding of human behavior, the most appropriate methodology was the execution of a closed-response questionnaire, according to Multi-Moti – Multi-Factor Scale of Work Motivation, and in a qualitative perspective the elaboration of an interview with the managers of a SME Excellence, a SME Leader and a SME Excellence and Leader, through a request for collaboration.

The companies targeted for the study are three. SME Excellence is made up of 76 employees from the industry sector, dedicated to the production and commercialization of ceramic materials; the SME Leader is made up of 68 employees of the transport sector, it is dedicated to the transport of national and international goods, operating particularly in Europe; the SME Excellence and Leader is made up of 72 employees of the commerce sector, it is dedicated to the commercialization of construction materials.

The questionnaire was delivered to 224 employees and 217 responses were obtained, of which 216 were valid, resulting in a response rate of 96.4%.

Items 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21 and 25 measure motivation with regard to “work organization”. This dimension seeks to know the degree of satisfaction of the employee in terms of working conditions and remuneration, as well as the sense of accomplishment with the functions that he/she performs, feedback received and participation in decision making;

Items 2, 6, 10, 14, 18, 22 and 26 are associated with the motivation for “performance”. This dimension seeks to understand if the periodic evaluations motivate the employee and if he likes to see his performance evaluated, the importance of showing emotion in the performance of the tasks, the development of strategies to reach the goals and the diversity of the tasks;

Items 3, 7, 11, 15, 19, 23 and 27 evaluate dimensions referring to the “realization and power” motives. This dimension seeks to know the importance of career perspectives, the degree of responsibility of the functions and the existence of awards attributed to the best collaborators;

Finally, items 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24 and 28 refer to aspects of motivation related to “commitment”. This dimension seeks to know the employee's level of motivation, the monotony of work, the emotional involvement with the organization, the importance of the knowledge and the identification with the function that it performs.

From the 28 items that make up the scale, items 8, 20 and 28 find the question posed in the negative, so they should be reversed ( Ferreira et al., 2006 ).

Next, items 29 to 33 refer to the SME Excellence/SME Leader Statute, which seeks to assess whether the statute helped motivate employees, improved working conditions, recognized the meaning of public recognition, and increased performance and productivity in the job. These issues were of own elaboration.

All these statements are associated with a Likert type response scale with five types of alternative responses, whose response positions oscillate between 1 – totally disagree, 2 – disagree, 3 – do not disagree or agree, 4 – agree and 5 – totally agree.

In a final part, there are a set of questions regarding the respondents’ age, gender, seniority in the organization and literary qualifications. It is important to note that the questionnaire is anonymous and restricted to the study in question.

The application of this questionnaire occurred during the months of July and August of 2016 through the paper delivery to the manager of the company. The analysis of the obtained results was through the software IBM SPSS Statistics 20.

Based on the purpose of the study, the interview was conducted to each of the managers of each SME, whether Excellency, Leader or both statutes, with the aim of seeking to understand the manager's position as well.

Thus, the interview was composed of 5 open-ended questions in which it was sought to determine whether, after obtaining the aforementioned statutes, the motivation of the employees changed, if there were differences in productivity and performance, if the motivation influenced the quality of the products and/or services and finally, if the companies had the objective to obtain the statutes again next year.

The data was entered into a database in the IBM SPSS Statistics 20 statistical program.

The profile of the sample under study at the demographic level was analyzed in four variables: gender, age, seniority in the organization and literacy.

Regarding the sex of the respondents, and according to Table 1 , it can be shown that, in general, there was a greater participation in the study of the male respondents, with 58.3%, in all 126 employees and with the lowest percentage of female employees with 41.7%, 90 employees.

Sex of respondents.

Regarding the age of the employees who participated in the study ( Table 2 ), the predominant age group is between 35 and 44 years old, with 12% and 9.3% respectively, in relation to SME Excellence and SME Leader. SME Excellence and Leader scored the highest percentage in the 25–34 age group with 13% of the respondents.

Age of respondents.

However, at the other extreme, SME Excellence is the respondent aged between 18 and 24 years, representing 4.2%, and in relation to SME Leader and SME Excellence and Leader, aged 55–64, who registered 0.9% of the employees of these SME. Based on the age of respondents, it is possible to verify that most of them are in a middle age (25–54 years).

Table 3 shows the variable seniority. In terms of seniority in the organization, employees are generally in the “1–5 years” organization, with values higher than the other categories for all SME, with 11.5%, 12.5% and 11, 1%, respectively.

Seniority in the organization.

However, the “less than 1 year” category recorded the lowest figures taking into account the other categories, with 3.2%, 2.9% and 3.7% respectively, as well as the “more than 15 years” category, which also had a lower value, with 3.7% of the respondents in relation to SME Excellence and Leader.

Regarding the educational qualifications of the respondents ( Table 4 ), the highest percentage is found in secondary education and basic education, representing a total of 53.7% and 25.9% respectively.

Literary qualifications of the respondents.

Analyzing Table 5 , according to the employees’ perception, it is verified that the most valued dimension is the “Realization and Power”, since it presents an average by size of more than 4 in relation to all SME under analysis.

Motivation in the work by dimension.

At the opposite end and with worse performance, according to the employees’ perception, the dimensions “Organization of Work” and “Commitment”, with averages below 4 are analyzed when analyzing all the SME together.

In general, the “work organization” dimension is more relevant when analyzed in SME Excellence and Leader with an average of 3.81. The “performance” dimension is given greater importance when analyzed in the SME Leader with an average of 4.27, as well as the dimension “realization and power” with an average of 4.23. Finally, the dimension “commitment” registered a lower average than the others, its value is relevant when analyzed the SME Excellence.

Later, a correlation was made between work motivation and age, motivation at work and seniority in the organization, motivation at work and literacy. As the variables are ordinal, the Spearman coefficient ( r ) was used ( Marôco, 2011 ).

In Table 6 , it can be seen that in SME Excellence, the higher the employees’ age, the smaller the “performance” dimension ( r = −0.519; p 0.01), that is, the company's older employees attribute ( Locke & Latham, 1990 ), and smaller the dimension “realization and power” ( r = −0.230; p 0.05), that is, do not have the need to receive immediate feedback or to be successful in performing relatively complex tasks ( McClelland, 1961 ).

Bivariate correlations – SME Excellence.

p -Value 0.05.

p -value 0.01.

Also, when analyzing seniority in the organization, the smaller the “performance” dimension ( r = −0.513; p 0.01), the smaller the “realization and power” dimension ( r = −0.336, p 0.01), that is, as in the variable age, also the longer they stay in the organization, according to the employees’ perception, the lower their performance in the work they perform, as well as their sense of accomplishment efficiency of work.

In terms of literacy, the higher the education of employees, the greater the “organization of work” dimension ( r = 0.347; p 0.01), that is, employees with a higher degree of qualifications are more identified with Hackman and Oldham (1974) . In this context, it is important to note that there is a greater degree of freedom in the planning and procedures to be used ( Hackman & Oldham, 1974 ). In addition, the “commitment” dimension ( r = 0.495, p 0.01) was higher, reflecting the employees’ emotional attachment to the company and their willingness to remain there ( Allen & Meyer, 1991 ).

In relation to the SME Leader ( Table 7 ), the older the “work organization” dimension ( r = 0.607; p 0.01), that is, in this case the company's older employees feel that the work has a positive impact on their lives, identify with what they produce, leading to a visible result ( Hackman & Oldham, 1974 ) ( r = 0.310, p 0.05), that is, older employees need to have immediate feedback, seeking personal fulfillment rather than the reward for success itself ( McClelland, 1961 ); however, the older the “commitment” dimension ( r = 0.303; p 0.05), which may reflect an emotional loss of attachment to work ( Allen & Meyer, 1991 ).

p -Value 0.01.

When analyzing seniority in the organization, it is verified that the longer the employees are in the company smaller the “performance” dimension ( r = −0.248; p 0.05), a possible explanation may lie in the definition of objectives that are too specific and difficult to understand, leading to the frustration and discouragement of employees who remain the longest in the organization ( Locke & Latham, 1990 ).

However, in terms of literacy, the higher the instruction, the greater the “Performance” dimension ( r = 0.272; p 0.05), that is, employees with a higher education level accept the objectives ( Locke & Latham, 1990 ).

Finally, in relation to SME Excellence and Leader ( Table 8 ), the larger the “organization of work” dimension ( r = 0.503; p 0.01), the larger the “performance” dimension ( r = 0.427, p 0.01), the higher the “realization and power” dimension ( r = 0.302, p 0.01), that is, the older the work performance, the better the performance levels and the definition of realistic and achievable goals, and the greater the sense of achievement and power ( Hackman & Oldham, 1974; Locke & Latham, 1990; McClelland, 1961 ). However, the older, the smaller the “commitment” dimension ( r = −0.274; p 0.05), since as they grow older, there are other personal and family responsibilities that are prioritized and distract employees and Allen and Meyer (1991) expose certain behaviors that they believe are the most morally correct.

Bivariate correlations – SME Excellence and Leader.

When analyzing seniority in the organization, it is verified that the longer the employees stay in the company, the smaller the “work organization” dimension is ( r = −0.428; p 0.01), the smaller the “performance” dimension ( r = −0.689, p 0.01), less the dimension “realization and power” ( r = −0.629, p 0.01), that is, the time they remain in the company can cause their motivation to decrease if their needs are not satisfied since older employees may have preference for cooperative environments rather than competitive environments, unlike employees who have been in the company for less than a year ( McClelland, 1961 ). Also, the lack of variety of tasks may lead to diminished motivation and which are difficult to comply with goals ( Hackman & Oldham, 1974; Locke & Latham, 1990 ).

In this SME no statistically significant correlations were found with the literacy variable.

A t-student parametric test was then performed to correlate the sex of the employees with the motivation at work in the three SME ( Table 9 ).

Student t test.

Regarding SME Excellence and SME Excellence and Leader there are differences in the “performance” and “realization and power” dimensions, with a p-value of less than 0.05, with women having significantly higher averages. In the SME Leader there are also differences in the dimensions “performance” and “achievement and power”, in the first dimension women have significantly higher means, while in the second dimension men reach similar results.

Employees answered to 5 questions related to the statute itself, whether it was Excellency, Leader or both. In these questions, employees were asked about whether the motivation at work, productivity, performance, working conditions and perceived public recognition by the company increased after obtaining the Bylaws.

Regarding the motivation at work after the attribution of the statutes, it is verified that according to the perception of the respondents ( Table 10 ), there were few changes in the motivation of the employees, since the results of the average remain close to 3 in the majority performance, productivity or working conditions, with the exception of the question “This organization attaches great importance to public recognition” with averages higher than the rest, since public recognition has many advantages for these companies with easier access to bank loans and it attracts more customers.

Obtaining the statutes.

One of the defined goals for this study was to see if there are significant differences in the motivation of the employees in the different SME Excellence, SME Leader and SME Excellence and Leader. Thereby, a multiple-choice test was given, comparing the means between three independent samples, allowing verifying if there are such differences.

In this case, the four dimensions of the Multi-Factor Scale will be taken into account, comparing the company averages and the standard deviation. Thus, a parametric test was chosen ( Table 11 ), since the SME variable has 3 groups, guaranteeing that the normality requirements of the distribution and the homogeneity of the variances were met.

One way ANOVA test.

According to the previous table, it is verified that according to the employees’ perception there is enough statistical evidence to conclude that there are no significant differences in the motivation of work in the different dimensions of “organization of work”, “realization and power” and “commitment”. SME Excellence, SME Leader and SME Excellence and Leader, accepting H0 and rejecting H1, since the p -value is greater than 0.05.

However, in the “performance” dimension through statistical analysis significant differences were found in the work motivation, according to the employees’ perception, i.e., we reject H0 and accept H1. According to Tukey's Post Hoc test the statistically significant differences for the “performance” dimension occur between the SME Leader and the SME Excellence with a 95% Confidence Interval (CI) of 0.052; 0.576 [and a p -value = 0.014].

The interviews contained 5 questions, in which they tried to verify if the obtaining of the Statutes SME Excellence, SME Leader and SME Excellence and Leader modified the motivation of the collaborators. Thus, the interviews were carried out at the premises of each SME, lasting 5 min and recorded with the authorization of the managers.

Initially, managers were questioned whether obtaining the staff regulations made employees feel more motivated. However, the three managers reported that most of their employees were not aware that the company was able to obtain the statute of Excellence, Leader or both, since the benefits that these statutes bring are financial.

Regarding productivity and performance, the three managers considered that they remained unchanged and that once again the statutes did not influence the behavior of employees, reinforcing the idea with “what contributes to the motivation of the workers is the salary at the end of the month” (SME Excellence and Leader Manager).

Regarding the motivation to influence the quality of the products and/or services provided, opinions are divided, since the manager of the SME Leader considers that it does not influence and the other two managers disagree, being that “if a worker is motivated, he/she will do his/her work more efficiently and with greater initiative and skill (SME Excellence Manager), and “if a person is motivated, he or she will perform correctly and will make certain to verify that they are fulfilling all the requirements will verify if the task has been completed as intended” (Manager of SME Excellence and Leader).

Finally, when asked if they want to obtain the SME Excellence statute, SME Leader or both, the managers responded affirmatively. However, they point out that this desire is due to financial results and not due to motivation at work, since in addition to public recognition they help in obtaining benefits, greater and better access to banking, in attracting new clients.

In short, in the opinion of the managers, the statutes did not change the behavior of their employees, and many are not aware that the company in which they work has the title, for example, of “Excellence”.

The new competitive reality entails the need for commitment from employees and a growing increase in performance. It is known that the variable motivation is correlated with performance. Thus, it is necessary to invest in factors that motivate the employees of the organizations.

Thus, leaving a motivated employee will be an added value for future organizational decisions, and employee motivation is a key point in organizations in highly competitive contexts, such SMEs. Thus, motivation at work is an important tool in the management of human resources of organizations, making it fundamental to assess the level of motivation in these companies, so that in the future there will be greater levels of trust and commitment between the company and the employee.

The main objective of this study was to assess the factors that explain the motivation of the employees of the three organizations and to evaluate if the status obtained had an influence on motivation, improvements in working conditions, increase of productivity and performance and public recognition in the perception of respondents.

By contrasting these results with the interviews with the top managers, the argument that only wages can motivate employees can be discarded and rejected. Such opinion on the part of top managers is not corroborated by the data and results from a classic, naive and paternalistic view/conception of man at work.

Regarding the question whether obtaining the statutes had a positive impact on the organizations under study, respondents felt that this did not lead to increased motivation, performance and productivity, nor improved working conditions, but they seem to believe in the impact on public recognition. An interpretation for these conclusions may be this: the employees did not feel that the obtaining of the statute, and consequent financial dividends obtained, improved the motivating factors in the work context, that is, the internal changes in these factors were not felt.

By recognizing that public recognition has in fact been achieved, it will be a way of saying that the benefits are channeled to the outside of the organization, to customers, for example, and, indirectly, to the top management who sees increased profits from the company. If the achievement of these statutes should be seen as an internal incentive, applied in the improvement and development of working conditions for employees, in order to motivate, satisfy and increase their performance accordingly, the fact is that this is not the view of top management who said during the interviews that the statutes do not influence motivation and admitted that obtaining financial incentives is the main objective pursued when there is an application to these statutes. This constitutes an instrumental, excessively financial vision of the issue, which, however, does not deviate from the short-term, reactive and little or no strategic vision that SMEs managers have of management.

Thus, the main contribution of the study shows the lack of focus on the employees by the top managers and the lack of strategy of the human resources management, being more interested in the financial aspect of the statutes. The logic demonstrated in the theoretical framework in which motivation leads to performance is not understood by top managers, who work without strategic planning, placing greater importance on salary as a motivational factor.

The development of this study will allow SMEs to perceive their strengths (which can be considered as competitive advantages) and their weaknesses, allowing their possible improvement in order to raise the levels of motivation. Only in this way will SMEs be able to maintain or raise the levels of motivation, trust, commitment and loyalty among employees.

It should be stressed that the recognition, image and obtaining of financial counterparts/facilities is the main objective for these companies. Respondents did not perceive differences in performance at work. The managers themselves seem to be more concerned with this purpose. This may lead to an increase in organizational performance, even if the social actors involved do not know how to identify it directly and immediately.

Organizations should convey to their employees what benefits the statutes bring to them, and a lack of communication on the part of the administrations has been verified. In this way, instead of valuing the benefits that the good financial results give him, they should give more importance to the people, being that they help the companies to grow both financially and socially (customers, community, suppliers, etc.). Thus, they could take advantage of these benefits to invest in the training of their employees and not only in the image they intend to convey, and the greater the investment in training, the better the image will be in the long term.

In addition, the Multi-Factor Scale is limited to four pre-established dimensions, which limits the scope of evaluation of employees, since they may consider other dimensions more important that are not covered by this same model.

One of the difficulties in carrying out this study was the waiting time in the collection of the questionnaires, since its delivery to the companies was at a time when many employees were on vacation, which led to an extensive delay of this process. Also, the time spent searching for companies with a high number of employees for the study was difficult and time-consuming.

In future work, it is also important to evaluate other variables that may influence motivation at work such as organizational communication, work-family balance, expectations regarding work, evaluating employees’ perception over time and by activity sector. It should be stressed that it is fundamental to look for new methods to motivate employees, from the awarding of prizes to continuous and personalized training.

• Subscribe to our newsletter
• Send to a friend
• Export reference

• Current Issue
• Supplements
• Aims and scope
• Editorial Board
• Most often read
• All metrics
• Call for papers
• Artículos más leídos
• Colecciones
• Fondo editorial
• Más información
• Download PDF

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Starbucks Corporation: Case Study in Motivation and Teamwork

Related Papers

Thin Solid Films

Patrik Hoffmann

Oriol Agulló

This document corresponds to D8.3: H - POPD - Requirement No. 3. According to the NEWSERA Grant Agreement, the next information is presented:<br> ● The informed consent procedures that will be implemented for the participation of humans.<br> ● Templates of the informed consent/assent forms and information sheets (in language and terms intelligible to the participants).<br> ● To meet inclusiveness, for children involved in the research, details on how their assent and the consent of the legal representatives will be acquired. An analogous procedure will be applied for vulnerable adults.

Revista De Filosofia De La Universidad De Costa Rica

Celso Vargas

Buyung Hartiyo Laksono

Background: Spinal anesthesia has become an alternative to general anesthesia. However, spinal anesthesia has the most common side effects including, bradycardia and hypotension. The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between changes in the inferior vena cava index (delta inferior vena cava index) to changes in mean arterial pressure in spinal anesthesia. Methods: This study was an observational pre-post test study in thirty-two patients who received spinal anesthesia. The inferior vena cava index (inferior vena cava collectibility index and caval-aorta index) was measured before and after spinal anesthesia (5 and 10 minutes after onset). Data were analyzed using the Kolmogorov Smirnov test, Shapiro-Wilk test, T-test, and correlation test with α=5% Result: There was a significant difference in mean arterial pressure (MAP), delta inferior vena cava collectibility index (D-IVC-CI), and delta caval-aorta index (D-CAo-I) before and after spinal anesthesia. D-IVC-CI and ...

Agriculture & Food Security

Background There is a need for better evidence for the impact of plant breeding research on nutrient-rich crops such as pulses to guide policy-making and investment. Mungbean (Vigna radiata (L). Wilczek) is one of the major pulses of South and Southeast Asia and makes an important contribution to food security and agricultural sustainability. The objective of this study is to quantify impact of and returns on investment from international mungbean breeding research for Myanmar. Methods This study applies the economic surplus model, which is a widely applied method to quantify the economic impact of agricultural technology adoption at the aggregate level. Sensitivity analysis is used to test some of the key assumptions underlying the method. All data come from secondary sources. Estimates of economic impact are combined with investment costs to quantify returns on investment. Results Four mungbean varieties coming out of international agricultural research and released by the nationa...

Asian Journal of Accounting Perspectives

julia mohd said

SEGMEN Jurnal Manajemen dan Bisnis

aris budiono

This study analyzes the effect of product quality, price perception, promotion, location, service quality on consumer loyalty through customer satisfaction at Bebek Kaleo Restaurant, Tebet, South Jakarta during the Covid-19 pandemic.Data collection through surveys with 105 respondents incidentally in October 2020. Data analysis techniques through Path Analysis, The Simultaneous Influence of Product Quality, Price, Promotion, Location, and Service Quality on Customer Satisfaction as well as Consumer Loyalty, Product quality, price perception, promotion have no effect on consumer satisfaction, location, service quality has a significant effect on customer satisfaction. Product Quality, Location Service Quality has no effect on Consumer Loyalty, Promotion and Satisfaction has a significant effect on Consumer Loyalty, all independent variables can directly influence the consumer loyalty variable without intervening customer satisfaction.Keywords : Product Quality, Price Perception, Prom...

Ensino em Re-vista

Adriana Pastorello Buim Arena

Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Sciences

Alamrew Eyayu

A 96 h static toxicity bioassay was carried out to examine fish responses and to determine the median lethal concentration (LC 50) of Balanites aegyptiaca stem bark extract on adults of Brycinus nurse, Labeobarbus bynni and Labeobarbus intermedius. Experimental fish were exposed to piscicide plant extract of 0.0 (control), 15.0, 17.5, 20.0, 22.5, and 25.0 mgL-1. Fish exposed to these extracts except the control showed symptoms of toxicity including darting, agitated swimming, air gulping, loss of sensitivity and knockdown before death. These responses were much frequent and faster in L. bynni and L. intermedius. The 96 h LC 50 values for the different test fishes were 18.99, 20.72 and 20.72 mg L-1 for L. bynni, L. intermedius and B. nurse, respectively. Based on the present investigation, we can conclude that the application of B. aegyptiaca extract causes lethal toxic effects on different fishes even at low concentrations and hence, indiscriminate use of the plant for fishing should be discouraged and regulated in order to protect fish biodiversity lose in the Alitash National Park area.

Cytopathology

harshita agarwal

RELATED PAPERS

Yuvraj Patil

Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

F. Tjerneld

Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

Nishit Patel

Fisheries Management and Ecology

MUNGANA AND THE MUNGANA HOSPITAL

Peter Stride

Genes & Immunity

David Emmanuel Silva Cruz

Language Testing in Asia

Prodhan Mahbub Ibna Seraj

Human Immunology

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH

Chhanda Das

Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development

Simon Kinyanjui

American Journal of Epidemiology

Moslem mansour lakouraj

Tofiq Najafli

International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology

Aayush pandey

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Study Guides
• Homework Questions

Effect-of-employee-motivation-on-marketing-performance-a-case-study-of-coca-cola-

• Log in Create free account

Exercise: Motivational Case Studies

Please login to like or save this resource

Motivational Theory: Case Study Example

Motivation is often best explained by reference to real examples. The 'Hellespont Swim' is a true story of unusual and remarkable personal achievement which demonstrates several aspects of motivational theory, plus various other principles of effective management and performance. 

• What motivational forces and factors can you see in this case study? What motivational theories and concepts are illustrated in the account - for example, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs , McGregor's X-Y Theory , McClelland's motivational theory  and the ideas of Adams , Bloom, Handy  and  Herzberg
• Also, what can you say about the story from the perspectives of teamwork, team-building, communications, planning and preparation, capability and potential, targets and goals, inspiration and role-models, skills/knowledge/attitude factors, humour and fun, project management, encouragement and coaching, project support, achievement and recognition, evaluation and measurement? 
• What aspects of the experience could have been improved or done differently and why? 
• What other aspects of personal motivation and achievement can you see in the story? 
• How might lessons and examples within this story be transferred to yourself, to employees and organisations?

The contribution of this article by writer and adventurer Charles Foster is gratefully acknowledged.

The Hellespont Swim

With a shout and a prayer and a curse, we leapt at dawn from a boat into the water of the Dardanelles and started to swim from Europe to Asia.

It had all started in London over the umpteenth bottle of Bulgarian red. For a long time, I said, I had wanted to swim the Hellespont - the narrow channel between the sea of Marmara and the Aegean. The Hellespont hit the mythological headlines a long time ago. Leander, who lived on the Asian side, had the misfortune to fall in love with Hero, who lived in Europe. The course of true love did not run smoothly. Geography was not on their side. The Hellespont has a nasty current ripping down the middle of it and a reputation for chewing up ships. And religion didn't help, either. Hero was a priestess of Aphrodite, and sworn to perpetual celibacy. So their meetings had to be covert and at night. Just as in most relationships, ancient and modern, the bloke did all the travelling. She held out a lantern, and he swam each night towards it. They copulated all night, and he then swam back. One night the wind blew out the lantern and that current took Leander out into the Aegean. He never returned. The heartbroken Hero had the decency to hurl herself into the Hellespont and the myth was born.

The Hellespont was assumed to be swimmable only by gods. But then, after one failed attempt, Byron did it, and it has been done from time to time since. We should have a go, I said to Steve and David (fat, pale, thirty-something pie-eaters like me). If a club-footed syphilitic like Byron could do it, so could we. The Bulgarian red spoke, and it said yes, and before it could withdraw I had put a deposit down and committed us to the swim.

The paperwork is nightmarish. The European shore, at Abydos, is inside a restricted military zone, and rumoured to be mined. The Hellespont itself is a marine motorway, carrying a huge volume of traffic between the Mediterranean and Istanbul and the Black Sea. The Turkish authorities don't like the idea of Englishmen's bodies choking the propellers of container ships, and insist on lots of permits. The man to sort all this out is Huseyin, whose long, white wispy hair makes him look like a mammalian anemone. He has organised most of the successful attempts on the Hellespont in recent years.

So we trained a bit. We lumbered over to municipal pools and floundered up and down. We never seemed to get faster or less tired, but we did seem to get a bit thinner. It was difficult to motivate ourselves because there really didn't seem to be much connection between the heated human soup of the public baths and the swimming of a major shipping lane. But the calendar ticked on, and we got on the plane, still a bit bemused, and found ourselves somehow in Cannakale.

Huseyin met us, mapped out the route (head-on into the current for a mile, and then a gentle swim home), made us eat moussaka and vitamin pills, told the barman not to serve us any beer, and booked our early morning calls for us so that we had no excuses.

With the dawn came renewed incredulity at our stupidity. It was cold, there were some vast tankers plying up and down, and the rip current at the centre of the channel was throwing up white horses that looked like Grand National winners. Also, Huseyin had told the press about the attempt. A launch full of photographers was following us, and failure would not be private.

As the sun came up our clothes came off. The lads on the boat rubbed us down with axle grease and with a great scream we committed our bodies to the deep. An underwater gust rolled me over, and from then on, the channel churned me emetically around.

As soon as I hit the sea I was on my own. Yes, somewhere behind me was the grumbling of the escort boat's engine, and somewhere way ahead Steve was burrowing efficiently towards fame, and somewhere to one side David was grunting and swallowing water, but I was in my own tiny world, hedged in by waves and the sides of my goggles, vaguely conscious that stretching down and down below was the vertiginous green of the channel. It was a lonely and disoriented business. If I stretched my neck up I could sometimes see the hills of Asia, but there was never any sense of movement. From the boat there were occasional shouted hints and words of encouragement like: "Sewage slick ahead: keep your mouth shut", and "This is where blood started to pour from the Ukrainian's ears."

Steve had set purposefully off with a front crawl of the sort he'd only ever used before to part crowds to get to the bar. I had thought that the waves would prevent really effective crawl, and had trained mostly using breaststroke. This was a stupid mistake. Breaststroke has a phase when there is little forward motion. When you are swimming into the current this means that you lose half of whatever distance the stroke has won you. It took me fifty minutes to realise this and change to a continuously propulsive front crawl, by which time Steve was almost in the arms of his very own Hero.

Rhythm is everything, the good swimmers say, and rhythm is hard when the sea which surges around you has no sense of it. You seem to make no progress at all. There was a vague sense of pressure against my chest as I ploughed into that current, but there was no visible fixed point against which I could measure any progress. Failure, though, was unthinkable. Too many people knew about this venture. If I didn't reach Sestos I could never return home. So I kept striking metronomically away and then, suddenly, the current eased. A shout from the boat told me to turn up the strait. That was the indication I had been waiting for. It meant that the back of the Hellespont was broken. I began to realise that there was no need to keep a lot in reserve any more.

From then it all happened quickly. There was a wisp of green weed at the bottom, and a stone appearing out of the gloom. Looking up, I could see the crenellations of Sestos castle on the gorse covered hills of Asia. A thousand miles away there was some cheering as the press men hauled Steve out of the shallows and asked him what on earth he had done this for. And then suddenly we were there too, stumbling out into towels and a posse of television camera men. They asked us for comment. David, mentally enfeebled by the effort, gave them an elaborate and deeply embarrassing pun about Leander's libido based on 'breaststroke' and 'breast stroking' which, laboriously translated into Turkish, started as gibberish and ended as filth. We ate nuts and pulled our bellies in for prime-time silly-season Turkish TV, and drank brandy to the memory of that great hard man, Leander, who had done this every night and back, for love, not glory.

Greek deity, it seems, is a reasonably accessible career. This is a classic swim, but not a particularly difficult one. David and I, who both used that pathetically inefficient breaststroke over the two miles, did it in about eighty minutes. Steve, who is a regular ten pints and three bags of chips man, wallowed home in under an hour. The rumours we had heard about hammerhead sharks, giant squid and solid rafts of jellyfish were unfounded. The rumours about diarrhoea and vomiting, however, are completely true. Those denizens of the deep strait between Europe and Asia are of truly mythological proportions. But that's another story. And who cares? According to the best authorities on Olympus, we were officially gods.

- Charles Foster 

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

• Essay Database >
• Essays Samples >
• Essay Types >
• Case Study Example

Motivation Case Studies Samples For Students

335 samples of this type

If you're looking for a possible method to streamline writing a Case Study about Motivation, WowEssays.com paper writing service just might be able to help you out.

For starters, you should skim our extensive database of free samples that cover most various Motivation Case Study topics and showcase the best academic writing practices. Once you feel that you've figured out the key principles of content structuring and taken away actionable ideas from these expertly written Case Study samples, composing your own academic work should go much smoother.

However, you might still find yourself in a circumstance when even using top-notch Motivation Case Studies doesn't allow you get the job done on time. In that case, you can contact our writers and ask them to craft a unique Motivation paper according to your custom specifications. Buy college research paper or essay now!

The Resignation of Port Hueneme Police Chief Kathleen Sheehan Case Study

Case study on motivating employees, free case study about patagonia.

Don't waste your time searching for a sample.

Get your case study done by professional writers!

Just from $10/page

Good Case Study About Human Resource

“human resource”, free case study about giving and receiving on freecycle.org, good example of case study on challenges with high performance work systems, good organizational behaviour case study example, introduction, a pay for performance system case study example, good case study on total quality management, example of leadership case study, intech mini case, good example of case study on making hotplates, organizational behavior case study, free organizational behavior academic case study example, reenergizing employees after a downsizing, motivation case study, good managing individual behavior case study example, sas’s corporate values and goals bring job satisfaction and motivation for sas’s employees:, good example of perception of leadership styles and trust across cultures and gender: a comparative case study, example of case study on sap & saviour beds, case study on the joe chaney case, sample case study on drnc, good joe chaney case case study example, free case study on human resource management, critical evaluation of the key issues, free developing a leadership competency model for library and information professionals case study example, good example of tci industries case study, example of case study on reflective journal 4: leadership and charisma, management and organizations, free case study on gloom time hangover, example of case study on washburn guitars: employee motivation.

Washburn is an American guitar producing company with a hundred and twenty three years heritage. They have an annual production average of fifty thousand guitars and a turnover of over forty million dollars.

Free Case Study On Goals

Personal information, case study on motivating employees - empowered and appreciated, question one, case study on swot analysis refers to an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities.

- Provide a SWOT analysis for this firm ensuring that core internal and external aspects are identified correctly in the right place

- Identify define and apply two motivation theories to illustrate the sources/causes of poor motivation

Incentive motivation theory

Case study on this part of the paper shall look t some of the possible solutions to the above, bus454-01 case study, case study on three-digit number.

The J. K. Roberts Company Case Study:

Motivation & Work Behavior (BUS454-01), Spring 2013

Expectancy theory case study example, analysis using motivation theories, free case study on organisations and behaviour, what need theories would explain why samuel gibson was unhappy despite his high income, free case study on authentic assessment, example of transcript case study.

Two business owners are seen coming out of their busy factories with workers rushing to get home. Factory 1 is colorful, cheerful and organized. Factory 2 is black and white and disorganized. The workers from Factory 1 are happy and chat with ease with their boss while the workers from factory 2 are grumpy and seem keen on running away from their boss.

Cheerful slow music plays in the background as the two business owners begin to chat

Nascar case study examples, motivation case study example, case study on tom muccio: negotiating the p&g-and-wal-mart relationship case study, case study on leadership scenario, hersey and blanchard’s situational theory, case study on leadership motivation and the case of alex stephanie, a brief study.

Leadership, Motivation and the Case of Alex & Stephanie: A Brief Study

Free Case Study On How To Make Great Teachers

Management and organization behavior case study examples, what was joanna reed’s diagnosis of the situation in the donor services department.

Employee commitment and relation is wanting in the donor services department. There is no coordination between them, as regards the conflicts they have among themselves. Dedication and loyalty to the department also lacks.

What should she recommend to Sam Wilson?

One recommendation is for Sam to hire another person to head the donor’s department as Jose seems to be so much concerned with the community issues. Secondly, there is need for policies that govern employee relationship and communication in the department, in bid to avoid personal problems influencing how employees relate.

Describe the managerial styles of Sam, Jose and Elena. What is the impact of their styles?

Case study on initech vs the coffee bean.

Modern day managers who care less about employee motivation and satisfaction do so at the business’s peril. It is imperative that the business managers put in place strategies to maintain low staff turnover by placing value not only on clients but also on the employees (Grant, 1984). Fullerton and Toossi (2001) assert that doing this assures the business of continuity and gives it a competitive edge over its competitors. The case of a Peter Gibbons working for Initech exemplifies this issue by contrasting the working conditions at Initech to those at Coffee Beans.

Peter’s achievement orientation

Motivation and work behavior case study examples, self determination theory case study, elements of the self-determination theory.

The Self-Determination Theory proposes that autonomous motivation is distinct from controlled motivation (Gagne and Deci, 2005) where autonomy “involves acting with a sense of volition and having the experience of choice” (Gagne and Deci, 2006, p. 333) while controlled motivation involves external regulation. It proposes that uninteresting activities require extrinsic motivation; thus, making the activity externally regulated.

Case Study On Robbins S Judge T 2010 Organizational Behavior 14th Ed New York Prentice Hall

Leadership and organizational change case study example, question 1. identify several common sense notions about leadership., southwests culture case study examples, leadership case study example.

A leader is someone who has the ability to set the example to his/her subjects, direct them on what to do, make right decisions and lead the team to achieve the goals set. Leaders should have some sets of qualities in order to be successful. Most business organizations aim at choosing leaders who can inspire the rest of the workers, keep them focused on achieving the targets and maintaining high discipline standards in the team. Leaders are not determined by their intelligence, but by their will to help the organization or team achieve its targets.

Case Study On Leadership and Organization

A case study on fridgecom.

Question 1: Using specific examples drawn from the case study, critically discuss different styles of leadership and potential behavioural responses.

Example Of Case Study On Motivation Case Study

Case study on managing people information and knowledge.

Using specific examples drawn from the case study, critically discuss different styles of leadership and potential behavioural responses.

In today’s global economy, leadership and organizational behaviour are important factors that can determine the success of organizations. However, the methods used by leaders to influence employees for achieving goals are a matter of contention among researchers (Skansi, 2000). In answering this question, various leadership styles that motivate employees to increase productivity levels have been discussed. This answer attempts to focus on the various modes of leadership and potential behavioural responses to them in terms of motivation, communication, perception, and teamwork.

Understanding Leadership

Example of management organizational behavior case study, management & organizational behavior.

Resistance is usually characterized by an opposition to the generally acceptable formats, which result in a change of organizational status quo. However, considering any resistance detrimental for the success of the change implementation does not reflect the full picture of the problem and limits the ability to use resistance for the benefits of the company (Eikenberry & Harris, 2011).

The Technicians Get The Feedback Through The Inspection Of Their Own Work Case Study

Good leadership, engagement, and motivation case study example, perfect model case study on a savage factory.

[Subject/Course] [Submission Date]

Motivating Employees: Free Sample Case Study To Follow

Apple’s best practices case studies example, inside apple, motivating employees: a sample case study for inspiration & mimicking, motivating employee.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline