Intrinsic Motivation Doesn't Exist, Researcher Says

[Guest guest]

Intrinsic Motivation Doesn't Exist, Researcher Says

COLUMBUS , Ohio -- While some psychologists still argue that people

perform better when they do something because they want to -- rather

than for some kind of reward, such as money -- Reiss suggests

we shouldn't even make that distinction.

Reiss, a professor of psychology at Ohio State University , argues

that a diverse range of human motivations can't be forced into these

categories of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Psycholgists say

intrinsic motivations are those that arise from within – doing

something because you want to – while extrinsic motivations mean

people are seeking a reward, such as money, a good grade in class,

or a trophy at a sporting event.

" They are taking many diverse human needs and motivations, putting

them into just two categories, and then saying one type of

motivation is better than another, " said Reiss, who outlines his

argument in the current issue of the journal Behavior Analyst.

" But there is no real evidence that intrinsic motivation even

exists. "

The issue is more than academic, Reiss said. Many sports psychology

books, and books advising how to motivate students and business

people, tout the value of intrinsic motivation and warn that

extrinsic rewards can undermine people's performance.

The argument is that people should do something because they enjoy

it, and that rewards only sabotage natural desire.

Reiss disagrees.

" There is no reason that money can't be an effective motivator, or

that grades can't motivate students in school, " he said. " It's all a

matter of individual differences. Different people are motivated in

different ways. "

Reiss has developed and tested a theory of motivation that states

there are 16 basic desires that guide nearly all meaningful

behavior, including power, independence, curiosity, and acceptance.

Whether you agree there are 16 desires or not, he said there is not

any way to reduce all of these desires to just two types.

In addition to trying to fit all motivations into two types, Reiss

said proponents of intrinsic motivation are also making value

judgments by saying some types of motivation are better than others.

" For example, some people have said that wealth and materialism lead

to inferior quality happiness, but there is no real proof of that, "

he said.

" Individuals differ enormously in what makes them happy – for some

competition, winning and wealth are the greatest sources of

happiness, but for others, feeling competent or socializing may be

more satisfying. The point is that you can't say some motivations,

like money, are inherently inferior. "

In the article, Reiss points to some of the problems he sees with

the theories and studies connected to intrinsic motivation. One

problem is that people who tout the value of intrinsic motivation

have several different definitions for what that means, and these

definitions change depending on circumstances.

One common definition, for example, is that intrinsic motivation is

that which is inherently pleasurable, while extrinsic motivation is

not. For example, the argument is that children are naturally

curious and enjoy learning for the joy it brings them. Grades, they

argue, are an extrinsic reward that fosters competition and makes

learning less pleasurable.

However, Reiss said his research has found people show a wide range

of curiosity – some people are very curious and enjoy spending a

great deal of time learning on their own. However, many people are

not very curious and don't enjoy learning for its own sake.

" There are many children for whom the important reward to them is

the grades they get, the competition among classmates, " Reiss

said. " This goes against what some psychologists say, who think

competition is bad and a non-competitive attitude is good, and that

learning and curiosity are intrinsic values that everyone shares.

They are pushing their own value system on to everybody. "

Another way of defining intrinsic motivation is the means-end

definition, which says intrinsic motivation is doing what we want,

whereas extrinsic motivation is doing something to get something

else. For example, some might argue that children playing baseball

are intrinsically motivated by the joy of playing, while a

professional baseball player is extrinsically motivated, by money

and championships.

But Reiss said this definition confuses means and ends. A child

playing baseball may be satisfying his need for physical exercise,

while the professional player is satisfying his parental instinct by

providing a good income for his family.

For children and professionals, baseball is a means to two different

ends.

Reiss also criticized many of the studies which proponents say prove

the existence of intrinsic motivation, and how it can be undermined

by extrinsic rewards.

For example, many studies have purportedly shown how people who

enjoy doing a specific activity – such as children who enjoy

drawing – do that activity less after they are offered rewards. But

when the results show the subjects continue the activity even after

the rewards are offered, the researchers have argued that this just

shows the subjects expect to get a reward and no longer are

intrinsically motivated.

" The results are always turned around to prove their hypothesis. "

Also, researchers have assumed that rewards simply make people less

interested in the intrinsic joys of an activity. But Reiss said many

of these studies haven't considered the possibility that the

negative effect of rewards has nothing to do with intrinsic or

extrinsic motivations. Instead, rewards may cause some people to

pursue an activity less because of the negative feelings they cause,

such as performance anxiety. Avoiding an activity because of

performance anxiety related to a reward is not the same as avoiding

it simply because the reward undermines intrinsic motivation.

" Too many studies that supposedly prove intrinsic motivation have

serious flaws in logic, or too many important uncontrolled

variables, " he said. " There needs to be more scientific rigor. "