Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation

Lepper and Henderlong (2000) review the early history and modern state of the research of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. They note that the early history of motivation research was solely focused on extrinsic motivation, i.e. Skinnerian psychology, in which extrinsic rewards (treats, money, and praise) affect one’s motivation to engage in an activity, and that intrinsic motivation was not considered until the latter half of the 20^th century. The 1950s saw the emergence of the so-called 4 C’s of intrinsic motivation: challenge, curiosity, control and context. As early as in 1959, White (1959, referred to in Lepper &

Henderlong, 2000) discovered the mastery motive, indicating that people might intentionally seek out new challenges and train new skills for the pleasure of such achievement itself. Berlyne (1960, referred to in Lepper & Henderlong, 2000), on the other hand, studied individual curiosity as a form of motivation and noted that people try to

make sense of the world around them, notwithstanding the possible extrinsic rewards. Hunt (1961, referred to in Lepper & Henderlong, 2000) described how people try to spontaneously exercise control over their environment without thinking about the possible rewards or punishments that might follow. Bruner (1961, referred to in Lepper &

Henderlong, 2000) studied the importance of context in learning, noting that students need to see the relevance of the skills that they are taught for such objectives as they may find inherently interesting outside the classroom.

After the Skinnerian model of extrinsic rewards and extrinsic motivation was joined by this new idea of intrinsic motivation and intrinsic rewards, it did not take long for researchers to study the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. The general finding was that extrinsic rewards may be detrimental to the level of intrinsic motivation that an individual has for a certain task, if the level of motivation has been high at the start. If the possibility of an extrinsic reward is taken away after it has been first introduced, someone with an initially high intrinsic motivation can lose his/her interest in the task. On the other hand, if the task is not initially interesting to an individual, the possible extrinsic rewards may enhance motivation to perform that task. On a more specific level, in his study of the types of extrinsic rewards, Deci (1971) noted that the detrimental effect was typical of physical rewards, rather than rewards that were purely verbal. Lepper and Henderlong (2000) encapsulate the main findings of the past few decades on extrinsic rewards and their effects on intrinsic motivation and note that these initial findings still hold true, with one clarification: It has been noted that random, unexpected extrinsic rewards are less likely to be detrimental to intrinsic motivation and are, in fact, possibly an enhancing force to one’s inherent interest.

Later research has also shown that these affects on intrinsic motivation by extrinsic rewards may result from the individual perceptions of the continued instrumental value of the task, personal competence and of external control (Lepper & Henderlong, 2000). Even if extrinsic rewards become unavailable, one’s perception of the task’s possible instrumental value in the future may enhance one’s motivation to practise that particular skill. Additionally, if one feels that what one is doing is enhancing one’s competence and is personally salient, it is likely to enhance motivation for a task. Further, the sense of inherent control is important for continued intrinsic motivation. If one feels like a pawn

after receiving an external reward for a completed task, it is unlikely to enhance intrinsic motivation to continue performing that task.

With respect to the research on how extrinsic rewards affect intrinsic motivation (e.g.

Harackiewicz & Sansone, 2000), it is important to note that intrinsic/extrinsic motivation is not an either-or question. In fact, it is quite the opposite. Many times people engage in activities towards which they feel both intrinsically and extrinsically motivated and thus both forms of motivation can easily coexist (e.g. Hidi, 2000; Sansone & Harackiewicz, 2000; Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2000; Lepper & Henderlong, 2000; Lepper, Sethi, Dialdin

& Drake, 1997). One example could be a sports hobby, which may be motivated both by a desire for personal health, as well as by the extrinsic reward of the pleasure expressed by one’s spouse for the fact that one leaves one’s computer alone for a little while. It can, therefore, be argued that intrinsic motivation of a learner is not necessarily undermined by the extrinsic rewards that a teacher may offer (grades, praise or mere approval) (e.g.

Lepper & Henderlong, 2000).

Shah and Kruglanski (2000) criticize reward motivation theories on the basis that although they pay proper respect to old Skinnerian psychology by still focusing on rewards and their effects, they have run into trouble trying to explain the variety of human behaviour. Shah and Kruglanski (ibid.) also note the increasing differentiation between different types of rewards and their effects (verbal and tangible, salient and non-salient, rewards based on contingencies, multiple and single rewards) as clear proof of this trouble. They continue that what one person considers a reward may be a punishment for another. Additionally, even modern researchers disagree on the actual effects of different kinds of rewards on extrinsic and intrinsic motivation (Sansone & Harackiewicz, 2000).

Intrinsic motivation is seen by some researcher as engaging in activities that satisfy one’s basic need for competence and control (e.g. Lepper & Henderlong, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000). In this way, the task that a person engages in is seen as interesting and motivating in its own right. For example, one may merely enjoy the act of studying a certain topic without any expectations of its usefulness in the future. Other researchers, however, divide intrinsic motivation into two distinct categories, depending on the structure and substance of the motivation (Shah & Kruglanski, 2000). The first category refers to a situation in which the activity is related to a single goal, and the second category when it is the content

of these goals that matters. Still other researchers point out that intrinsic motivation is closely related to interest and differentiate between situational interest and individual interest (Hidi, 2000; Renninger, 2000; see also Sansone & Smith, 2000).

Extrinsic motivation is often connected with extrinsic rewards, but the specific definition of these rewards may be very different from one definition of extrinsic motivation to the next. Sansone and Harackiewicz (2000) note that there seem to be two basic definitions of extrinsic motivation. According to the first, motivation is extrinsic when it is motivated by something extrinsic to the activity, and according to the second, motivation is extrinsic when it is motivated by something extrinsic to the person (ibid. p. 445); for example, by situational interest (Hidi, 2000).

As a result of discrepancies that have arisen in motivation research based on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, and despite its positive aspects and a certain clarity it has brought to understanding of reward-based intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, a different approach is needed; one that, from the start, takes into account the cognitive aspects of motivation.