Have you ever wondered what it takes to be engaged in a task? Or what drives one individual to perform tasks with enthusiasm while another hates the same task but for some reason still pursues it?
These are examples of questions which have been around for decades and have cued our search to understand human motivation.
The concept of motivation is as old as organizational science and ample frameworks have been proposed in an attempt to understand what drives us to act. This is evident in the work of Weiner (1990), where the theories of motivation were classified according era from 1940s to the 1990s (Graham & Weiner, 1996). However a common thread in these theories is that of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation
Firstly it is crucial to define motivation, Deci & Ryan (1985; 2000) describe motivation as the process of being moved to act, behave or do something and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation can offer an understanding of what causes our motivations to behave, act or do something.
Ryan & Deci (2000) define intrinsic motivation as
“ ..doing of an activity for its inherent satisfactions rather than for some separable consequences”
Simply put, an individual is intrinsically motivated to do something when he/she likes what they are doing. For instance, artists love painting, they paint for the sake of the activity itself, for the positive experience of performing not for the potential secondary gains that may arise from doing what they love.
The core of intrinsic motivation is recognizing that every individual has that activity, action or behavior which they love to do and which they are motivated to perform for just this reason.
Extrinsic motivation on the other hand as defined by (Deci & Ryan,1985; Ryan & Deci,2000) is
“ a construct that pertains whenever an activity is done in order to attain some separable outcome.”
This definition posits the contrast between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation by explaining the difference in motive behind an individual’s involvement in an activity. Whilst one is performance for the joy of engaging the other is action for a different and separate result.
For example, let us imagine two individuals exercise by riding a bike every day. Though both of them are perform the same activity, the driving force could be very different.
If one of them is trying to lose weight and to have better self esteem, she performs this activity for this separate outcome. This individual is therefore extrinsically motivated because the act of riding a bike is for a different outcome than the enjoyment of the exercise itself.
Meanwhile the second individual loves to ride his bike, though he too will have secondary benefits from the exercise, he gets on his bike and exercises every day because he enjoys the adrenaline, freedom and experience of flow he feels from his favourite sport.
Now that we have these basic concepts it is time to delve into Self-Determination Theory.
The Self-Determination Theory
The Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1980; 1985; 2000) has furthered the literature on motivation where the concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic are broken down into categories distinguishing various types of these two umbrella terms.
In other words, the SDT presents motivation as a spectrum from controlled to autonomous motivation.
Controlled motivation relates to motivation that arises from external contingencies and introjected regulation whilst autonomous motivation is defined as the type of motivation which individuals ideally have integrated into their sense of self where they can perceive the inherent value of a specific activity or behaviour.
Deci & Ryan (1985) go further still by recognizing that both autonomous and controlled motivation are comprised of factors of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Here is figure showing the continuum of motivation as explained in the SDT:
In addition, the SDT presents two sub theories to account for a more nuanced understanding of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. These sub theories are Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET) and Organismic Integration Theory (OIT) which help explain intrinsic motivation with regards to its social factors and the various degrees of contextual factors that influence extrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Let’s take a deeper look:
Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET)
According to CET intrinsic motivation can be facilitating or undermining, depending on the social and environmental factors in play. Referring to the Needs Theory, Deci & Ryan (1985,2000) argue that interpersonal events, rewards, communication and feedback that gear towards feelings of competence when performing an activity will enhance intrinsic motivation for that particular activity.
However, this level of intrinsic motivation is not attained if the individual doesn’t feel that the performance itself is self- determined or that they had the autonomous choice to perform this activity.
So, for a high level of intrinsic motivation two psychological needs have to be fulfilled:
- The first is competence, so that the activity results in feelings of self-development and efficacy.
- The second is the need for autonomy that performance of the chosen activity was self-initiated or self-determined.
Thus for CET theory to hold true, motivation needs to be intrinsic and have an appeal to the individual. It also implies that intrinsic motivation will be enhanced or undermined depending on whether the needs for autonomy and competence are supported or thwarted respectively.
Organismic Integration Theory (OIT)
The second sub theory is Organismic Integration Theory (OIT) which argues that extrinsic motivation depends on the extent to which autonomy is present.
In other words, extrinsic motivation varies according to the internalization and integration of the value of the activity. Internalization is how well the value of an activity is felt while integration explains the process of individual transformation from external regulation to their own self-regulated version (Ryan & Deci,2000).
For instance, school assignments are an externally regulated activity. Internalization in this situation can be understood as the child seeing the value and importance of the assignment while integration in this situation would be the degree to which he perceives performing the assignment as his own choice.
The OIT thus offers us a greater perspective into the difference levels of extrinsic motivation which exist and the processes of internalization and integration which could eventually result in the autonomous choice of performing the activity for its intrinsic perceived joy and value.
In Conclusion
The Self-Determination Theory of motivation is a comprehensive framework which is crucial to our understanding of motivation. The SDT expands the constricted, unitary concept of intrinsic motivation in terms of its greater social context (CET) and extrinsic motivation in terms of its process of internalization and integration (OIT) thus presenting a multifaceted, nuanced picture of just why we do what we do.
About the Author
This article was written by one of our guest authors Arun Gurung. A positive psychology practitioner since being exposed to the positive world of happiness, compassion, gratitude while following Professor, Ed Diener’s work on Subjective well-being. He works with mindfulness interventions, resilience, compassion and well-being. He aims to bring positive psychology to his home country of Nepal in the future.
References
References
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985).Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Pantheon.
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.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49(3), 182.
Graham, S., & Weiner, B. (1996). Theories and principles of motivation.Handbook of educational psychology, 4, 63-84.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.American psychologist, 55(1), 68.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 54-67.
Weiner, B. (1990). History of motivational research in education. Journal of educational Psychology, 82(4), 61
The post Self Determination Theory (SDT): The Many Faces of Motivation appeared first on .