Motivation in

Historical Perspective

Chapter 2

Motivation in

Historical Perspective

A historical view of motivation study helps us to consider…

how the concept of motivation came to prominence(유명함),

how it changed and developed,

how ideas were challenged and replaced,

how the field reemerged and brought together various disciplines within psychology.

Outline : History of Motivation

Philosophical Origins of Motivational Concepts

The First Grand Theory: Will

The Second Grand Theory: Instinct

The Third Grand Theory: Drive

The Fourth Grand Theory: Incentive, Arousal, Discrepancy

Rise of the Mini-theories

Contemporary Era

•Freud’s Drive Theory

•Hull’s Drive Theory

•The Active Nature of the Person

•The Cognitive Revolution

•Applied Socially Relevant Research

All- encompassing theory that seeks to explain the full range of motivated action—why we eat, drink, work, play, compete, fear certain things, read, fall in love, and so on.

GRAND THEORIES

The ancient philosophers understood motivation within the two themes:

good, rational,

immaterial, and active

(i.e., the will)

primitive, impulsive,

biological, and reactive

(i.e., bodily desires).

Physiological analysis of motivation by focusing on the mechanistic.

The appeal of instinct

doctrine was its ability to

explain unlearned behavior

that had energy and purpose

(i.e., goal-directed biological

impulses).

Drive theory view that behavior was motivated

to the extent that it served the needs of the organism and restored

a biological homeostasis.

Will Instinct Drive

A bodily deficit occurs

(e.g., blood sugar drops & a sense of hunger emerges).

The intensity of the bodily deficit grows & emerges into consciousness as a psychological discomfort, which is anxiety.

Seeking to reduce anxiety & satisfy the bodily deficit, the person searches out & consumes a need satisfying environmental object (e.g., food).

If the environmental object successfully satisfies the bodily deficit, satisfaction occurs & quiets anxiety, at least for a period of time.

A SUMMARY OF FREUD’S DRIVE THEORY

Figure 2.1

Drive’s

Source

Drive’s

Impetus

Drive’s

Object

Drive’s

Aim

Decline of GRAND THEORIES

Will Instinct Drive

The philosophical study of the will turned out to be a dead end that explained very little about motivation, as it actually raised more questions than it answered.

The physiological study of the instinct proved to be an intellectual dead end as well, as it became clear that “naming is not explaining.”

Drive theory proved itself to be overly limited in scope, and with its rejection came the field’s disillusionment with grand theories in general, though several additional grand motivational principles emerged with some success, including incentive and arousal.

1. Sigmund Freud 6. Edward Thorndike

2. Clark Hull 7. William James

3. Wilhelm Wundt 8. Max Wertheimer

4. Ivan Pavlov 9. Edward Tolman

5. John Watson 10. Kurt Lewin

Mid-Century Rankings of

The 10 Most Important

Historical Figures in Psychology

Table 2.1

1. B. F. Skinner 6. Carl Rogers

2. Jean Piaget 7. Stanley Schachter

3. Sigmund Freud 8. Neal Miller

4. Albert Bandura 9. Edward Thorndike

5. Leon Festinger 10. Abraham Maslow

The Current Top 10 Eminent Psychologists

in The 21st Century

First,

motivation study rejected its commitment

to a passive view of human nature and

adopted a more active portrayal of human

beings.

Second,

motivation turned decidedly cognitive

and somewhat humanistic.

Third,

the field focused on applied,

socially relevant problems.

Post-Drive Theory Years

Outline of the Typical Development of a Scientific Discipline

New paradigm

Crisis and Revolution

Paradigmatic

Preparadigmatic

A budding science emerges. It consists of participants who

do not share the same language or the same knowledge base.

debates are frequent about what should be the discipline’s

methods, problems, and solutions.

Preparadigmatic factionalism merges into a shared consensus

about what constitutes the discipline’s methods, problems, and

solutions. This shared consensus is called a paradigm.

participants who share this paradigm accumulate knowledge

and make incremental advances.

An anomaly emerges that cannot be explained by the existing

consensus/paradigm. A clash erupts between the old way of

thinking (that can explain the anomaly).

The new way brings discipline-changing progress. Embracing

the new consensus, participants settle back into the new

paradigm(a new Paradigmatic stage). Progress returns to

making incremental advances.

1. Motivational phenomenon

(e.g.., the flow experience)

2. Particular circumstances that affect motivation

(e.g., failure feedback)

3. Groups of people

(e.g., extraverts, children, workers)

4. Theoretical questions

(e.g., what is the relationship between cognition & emotion?)

Rise of the Mini-Theories

Unlike grand theories that try to explain the full range of motivation, mini-theories limit their attention:

Abbreviated list of the mini-theories

Achievement motivation theory (Atkinson, 1964)

Attributional theory of achievement motivation (Weiner, 1972)

Cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957)

Effectance motivation (White, 1959; Harter, 1978a)

Expectancy x value theory (Vroom, 1964)

Goal-setting theory (Locke, 1968)

Intrinsic motivation (Deci, 1975)

Learned helplessness theory (Seligman, 1975)

Reactance theory (Brehm, 1966)

Self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977)

Self-schemas (Markus, 1977)

Social

Industrial/

Organizational

Developmental

Educational

Personality Cognitive

Clinical Physiological

HealthCounseling

Motivation and Emotion

Domain-specific Answers to

These Core Questions:

What causes behavior?

Why does behavior vary in its intensity?

Relationship of

Motivation Study to

Psychology’s Areas

of Specialization

Figure 2.2

Motivation study in the 21st century is populated by multiple perspectives and multiple voices, all of which contribute a different piece to the puzzle of motivation and emotion study.

Motivation’s new paradigm is one in which behavior is energized and directed not by a single grand cause but, instead, by a multitude of multi-level and co-acting influences.

As expressed in Box 2, most motivational states can be (and indeed need to be) understood at multiple levels—from a neurological level, a cognitive level, a social level, and so on.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Perspective: Motives emerge from…

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Behavioral Environmental incentives

Neurological Brain activations

Physiological Hormonal activity

Cognitive Mental events and thoughts

Social-cognitive Ways of thinking guided

by exposure to other people

Cultural Groups, organizations, and

nations

Evolutionary Genes and genetic

endowment

Humanistic Encouraging the human

potential

Psychoanalytical Unconscious mental life__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Box 2

The Many Voices in Motivation Study

End of Chapter 2