 |
| Fundamental Achievment Motivation |
Motivation can
be defined as the driving force behind all the actions of an individual. The
influence of an individual's needs and desires both have a strong impact on the
direction of their behavior. Motivation is based on your emotions and
achievement-related goals. There are different forms of motivation including
extrinsic, intrinsic, physiological, and achievement motivation. There are also
more negative forms of motivation. Achievement motivation can be defined as the
need for success or the attainment of excellence. Individuals will satisfy
their needs through different means, and are driven to succeed for varying
reasons both internal and external.
Motivation is
the basic drive for all of our actions. Motivation refers to the dynamics of
our behavior, which involves our needs, desires, and ambitions in life.
Achievement motivation is based on reaching success and achieving all of our
aspirations in life. Achievement goals can affect the way a person performs a
task and represent a desire to show competence (Harackiewicz, Barron, Carter,
Lehto, & Elliot, 1997). These basic physiological motivational drives
affect our natural behavior in different environments. Most of our goals are
incentive-based and can vary from basic hunger to the need for love and the
establishment of mature sexual relationships. Our motives for achievement can
range from biological needs to satisfying creative desires or realizing success
in competitive ventures. Motivation is important because it affects our lives
everyday. All of our behaviors, actions, thoughts, and beliefs are influenced
by our inner drive to succeed.
Implicit and
Self-Attributed Motives
 |
| Success and confidence are fundamental motivation |
Motivational researchers share the view that achievement behavior
is an interaction between situational variables and the individual subject's
motivation to achieve. Two motives are directly involved in the prediction of
behavior, implicit and explicit. Implicit motives are spontaneous impulses to
act, also known as task performances, and are aroused through incentives
inherent to the task. Explicit motives are expressed through deliberate choices
and more often stimulated for extrinsic reasons. Also, individuals with strong
implicit needs to achieve goals set higher internal standards, whereas others
tend to adhere to the societal norms. These two motives often work together to
determine the behavior of the individual in direction and passion (Brunstein
& Maier, 2005).
Explicit and implicit
motivations have a compelling impact on behavior. Task behaviors are
accelerated in the face of a challenge through implicit motivation, making
performing a task in the most effective manner the primary goal. A person with
a strong implicit drive will feel pleasure from achieving a goal in the most
efficient way. The increase in effort and overcoming the challenge by mastering
the task satisfies the individual. However, the explicit motives are built
around a person's self-image. This type of motivation shapes a person's
behavior based on their own self-view and can influence their choices and
responses from outside cues. The primary agent for this type of motivation is
perception or perceived ability. Many theorists still can not agree whether achievement
is based on mastering one's skills or striving to promote a better self-image
(Brunstein & Maier, 2005). Most research is still unable to determine
whether these different types of motivation would result in different behaviors
in the same environment.
The Hierarchal
Model of Achievement Motivation
Achievement motivation has been conceptualized in many different
ways. Our understanding of achievement-relevant effects, cognition, and
behavior has improved. Despite being similar in nature, many achievement
motivation approaches have been developed separately, suggesting that most
achievement motivation theories are in concordance with one another instead of
competing. Motivational researchers have sought to promote a hierarchal model
of approach and avoidance achievement motivation by incorporating the two
prominent theories: the achievement motive approach and the achievement goal
approach. Achievement motives include the need for achievement and the fear of
failure. These are the more predominant motives that direct our behavior toward
positive and negative outcomes. Achievement goals are viewed as more solid
cognitive representations pointing individuals toward a specific end. There are
three types of these achievement goals: a performance-approach goal, a
performance-avoidance goal, and a mastery goal. A performance-approach goal is
focused on attaining competence relative to others, a performance-avoidance
goal is focused on avoiding incompetence relative to others, and a mastery goal
is focused on the development of competence itself and of task mastery.
Achievement motives can be seen as direct predictors of achievement-relevant
circumstances. Thus, achievement motives are said to have an indirect or distal
influence, and achievement goals are said to have a direct or proximal
influence on achievement-relevant outcomes (Elliot & McGregor, 1999).
These motives and goals
are viewed as working together to regulate achievement behavior. The hierarchal
model presents achievement goals as predictors for performance outcomes. The
model is being further conceptualized to include more approaches to achievement
motivation. One weakness of the model is that it does not provide an account of
the processes responsible for the link between achievement goals and performance.
As this model is enhanced, it becomes more useful in predicting the outcomes of
achievement-based behaviors (Elliot & McGregor, 1999).
Achievement
Goals and Information Seeking
 |
| Life Need Goals |
Theorists have proposed that people's achievement goals affect their
achievement-related attitudes and behaviors. Two different types of
achievement-related attitudes include task-involvement and ego-involvement.
Task-involvement is a motivational state in which a person's main goal is to
acquire skills and understanding whereas the main goal in ego-involvement is to
demonstrate superior abilities (Butler, 1999). One example of an activity where
someone strives to attain mastery and demonstrate superior ability is
schoolwork. However situational cues, such as the person's environment or
surroundings, can affect the success of achieving a goal at any time.
Studies confirm that a
task-involvement activity more often results in challenging attributions and
increasing effort (typically in activities providing an opportunity to learn
and develop competence) than in an ego-involvement activity. Intrinsic
motivation, which is defined as striving to engage in activity because of
self-satisfaction, is more prevalent when a person is engaged in task-involved
activities. When people are more ego-involved, they tend to take on a different
conception of their ability, where differences in ability limit the
effectiveness of effort. Ego-involved individuals are driven to succeed by
outperforming others, and their feelings of success depend on maintaining
self-worth and avoiding failure. On the other hand, task-involved individuals
tend to adopt their conception of ability as learning through applied effort
(Butler, 1999). Therefore less able individuals will feel more successful as
long as they can satisfy an effort to learn and improve. Ego-invoking
conditions tend to produce less favorable responses to failure and difficulty.
Competence moderated
attitudes and behaviors are more prevalent in ego-involved activities than
task-involved. Achievement does not moderate intrinsic motivation in
task-involving conditions, in which people of all levels of ability could learn
to improve. In ego-involving conditions, intrinsic motivation was higher among
higher achievers who demonstrated superior ability than in low achievers who
could not demonstrate such ability (Butler, 1999). These different attitudes
toward achievement can also be compared in information seeking.
Task- and ego-involving
settings bring about different goals, conceptions of ability, and responses to
difficulty. They also promote different patterns of information seeking. People
of all levels of ability will seek information relevant to attaining their goal
of improving mastery in task-involving conditions. However they need to seek information
regarding self-appraisal to gain a better understanding of their self-capacity
(Butler, 1999). On the other hand people in ego-involving settings are more
interested in information about social comparisons, assessing their ability
relative to others.
Self-Worth
Theory in Achievement Motivation
Self-worth theory states that in certain situations students stand
to gain by not trying and deliberately withholding effort. If poor performance
is a threat to a person's sense of self-esteem, this lack of effort is likely
to occur. This most often occurs after an experience of failure. Failure
threatens self-estimates of ability and creates uncertainty about an
individual's capability to perform well on a subsequent basis. If the following
performance turns out to be poor, then doubts concerning ability are confirmed.
Self-worth theory states that one way to avoid threat to self-esteem is by
withdrawing effort. Withdrawing effort allows failure to be attributed to lack
of effort rather than low ability which reduces overall risk to the value of
one's self-esteem. When poor performance is likely to reflect poor ability, a
situation of high threat is created to the individual's intellect. On the other
hand, if an excuse allows poor performance to be attributed to a factor
unrelated to ability, the threat to self-esteem and one's intellect is much
lower (Thompson, Davidson, & Barber, 1995).
A study was conducted on
students involving unsolvable problems to test some assumptions of the
self-worth theory regarding motivation and effort. The results showed that
there was no evidence of reported reduction of effort despite poorer
performance when the tasks were described as moderately difficult as compared
with tasks much higher in difficulty. The possibility was raised that low
effort may not be responsible for the poor performance of students in
situations which create threats to self-esteem. Two suggestions were made, one
being that students might unconsciously withdraw effort, and the other stating
that students may reduce effort as a result of withdrawing commitment from the
problem. Regardless of which suggestion is true, self-worth theory assumes that
individuals have a reduced tendency to take personal responsibility for failure
(Thompson, Davidson, & Barber, 1995).
Avoidance
Achievement Motivation
In everyday life, individuals strive to be competent in their
activities. In the past decade, many theorists have utilized a social-cognitive
achievement goal approach in accounting for individuals striving for competence.
An achievement goal is commonly defined as the purpose for engaging in a task,
and the specific type of goal taken on creates a framework for how individuals
experience their achievement pursuits. Achievement goal theorists commonly
identify two distinct ideas toward competence: a performance goal focused on
demonstrating ability when compared to others, and a mastery goal focused on
the development of competence and task mastery. Performance goals are
hypothesized to produce vulnerability to certain response patterns in
achievement settings such as preferences for easy tasks, withdrawal of effort
in the face of failure, and decreased task enjoyment. Mastery goals can lead to
a motivational pattern that creates a preference for moderately challenging tasks,
persistence in the face of failure, and increased enjoyment of tasks (Elliot
& Church, 1997).
Most achievement goal
theorists conceptualize both performance and mastery goals as the
"approach" forms of motivation. Existing classical achievement motivation
theorists claimed that activities are emphasized and oriented toward attaining
success or avoiding failure, while the achievement goal theorists focused on
their approach aspect. More recently, an integrated achievement goal
conceptualization was proposed that includes both modern performance and
mastery theories with the standard approach and avoidance features. In this
basis for motivation, the performance goal is separated into an independent
approach component and avoidance component, and three achievement orientations
are conceived: a mastery goal focused on the development of competence and task
mastery, a performance-approach goal directed toward the attainment of
favorable judgments of competence, and a performance-avoidance goal centered on
avoiding unfavorable judgments of competence. The mastery and
performance-approach goals are characterized as self-regulating to promote
potential positive outcomes and processes to absorb an individual in their task
or to create excitement leading to a mastery pattern of achievement results.
Performance-avoidance goals, however, are characterized as promoting negative
circumstances. This avoidance orientation creates anxiety, task distraction,
and a pattern of helpless achievement outcomes. Intrinsic motivation, which is
the enjoyment of and interest in an activity for its own sake, plays a role in
achievement outcomes as well. Performance-avoidance goals undermined intrinsic
motivation while both mastery and performance-approach goals helped to increase
it (Elliot & Church, 1997).
Most achievement theorists
and philosophers also identify task-specific competence expectancies as an
important variable in achievement settings. Achievement goals are created in
order to obtain competence and avoid failure. These goals are viewed as
implicit (non-conscious) or self-attributed (conscious) and direct achievement
behavior. Competence expectancies were considered an important variable in
classical achievement motivation theories, but now appear to only be moderately
emphasized in contemporary perspectives (Elliot & Church, 1997).
Approach and
Avoidance Goals
Achievement motivation theorists focus their research attention on
behaviors involving competence. Individuals aspire to attain competence or may
strive to avoid incompetence, based on the earlier approach-avoidance research
and theories. The desire for success and the desire to avoid failure were
identified as critical determinants of aspiration and behavior by a theorist
named Lewin. In his achievement motivation theory, McClelland proposed that
there are two kinds of achievement motivation, one oriented around avoiding
failure and the other around the more positive goal of attaining success.
Atkinson, another motivational theorist, drew from the work of Lewin and McClelland
in forming his need-achievement theory, a mathematical framework that assigned
the desire to succeed and the desire to avoid failure as important determinants
in achievement behavior (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996).
Theorists introduced an
achievement goal approach to achievement motivation more recently. These
theorists defined achievement goals as the reason for activities related to
competence. Initially, these theorists followed in the footsteps of Lewin,
McClelland, and Atkinson by including the distinction between approach and
avoidance motivation into the structure of their assumptions. Three types of
achievement goals were created, two of which being approach orientations and
the third an avoidance type. One approach type was a task involvement goal
focused on the development of competence and task mastery, and the other being
a performance or ego involvement goal directed toward attaining favorable
judgments of competence. The avoidance orientation involved an ego or
performance goal aimed at avoiding unfavorable judgments of competence. These
new theories received little attention at first and some theorists bypassed
them with little regard. Motivational theorists shifted away and devised other
conceptualizations such as Dweck's performance-learning goal dichotomy with
approach and avoidance components or Nicholls' ego and task orientations, which
he characterized as two forms of approach motivation (Elliot &
Harackiewicz, 1996).
Presently, achievement
goal theory is the predominant approach to the analysis of achievement
motivation. Most contemporary theorists use the frameworks of Dweck's and
Nicholls' revised models in two important ways. First, most theorists institute
primary orientations toward competence, by either differentiating between
mastery and ability goals or contrasting task and ego involvement. A contention
was raised toward the achievement goal frameworks on whether or not they are
conceptually similar enough to justify a convergence of the mastery goal form
(learning, task involvement and mastery) with the performance goal form
(ability and performance, ego involvement, competition). Secondly, most modern
theorists characterized both mastery and performance goals as approach forms of
motivation, or they failed to consider approach and avoidance as independent
motivational tendencies within the performance goal orientation (Elliot &
Harackiewicz, 1996).
The type of orientation
adopted at the outset of an activity creates a context for how individuals
interpret, evaluate, and act on information and experiences in an achievement
setting. Adoption of a mastery goal is hypothesized to produce a mastery
motivational pattern characterized by a preference for moderately challenging
tasks, persistence in the face of failure, a positive stance toward learning,
and enhanced task enjoyment. A helpless motivational response, however, is the
result of the adoption of a performance goal orientation. This includes a
preference for easy or difficult tasks, effort withdrawal in the face of
failure, shifting the blame of failure to lack of ability, and decreased
enjoyment of tasks. Some theorists include the concept of perceived competence
as an important agent in their assumptions. Mastery goals are expected to have
a uniform effect across all levels of perceived competence, leading to a
mastery pattern. Performance goals can lead to mastery in individuals with a
high perceived competence and a helpless motivational pattern in those with low
competence (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996).
Three motivational goal
theories have recently been proposed based on the tri-variant framework by
achievement goal theorists: mastery, performance-approach, and
performance-avoidance. Performance-approach and mastery goals both represent
approach orientations according to potential positive outcomes, such as the
attainment of competence and task mastery. These forms of behavior and
self-regulation commonly produce a variety of affective and
perceptual-cognitive processes that facilitate optimal task engagement. They
challenge sensitivity to information relevant to success and effective
concentration in the activity, leading to the mastery set of motivational
responses described by achievement goal theorists. The performance-avoidance
goal is conceptualized as an avoidance orientation according to potential
negative outcomes. This form of regulation evokes self-protective mental
processes that interfere with optimal task engagement. It creates sensitivity
to failure-relevant information and invokes an anxiety-based preoccupation with
the appearance of oneself rather than the concerns of the task, which can lead
to the helpless set of motivational responses. The three goal theories
presented are very process oriented in nature. Approach and avoidance goals are
viewed as exerting their different effects on achievement behavior by
activating opposing sets of motivational processes (Elliot & Harackiewicz,
1996).
Intrinsic
Motivation and Achievement Goals
Intrinsic motivation is defined as the enjoyment of and interest
in an activity for its own sake. Fundamentally viewed as an approach form of
motivation, intrinsic motivation is identified as an important component of
achievement goal theory. Most achievement goal and intrinsic motivational
theorists argue that mastery goals are facilitative of intrinsic motivation and
related mental processes and performance goals create negative effects. Mastery
goals are said to promote intrinsic motivation by fostering perceptions of
challenge, encouraging task involvement, generating excitement, and supporting
self-determination while performance goals are the opposite. Performance goals
are portrayed as undermining intrinsic motivation by instilling perceptions of
threat, disrupting task involvement, and creating anxiety and pressure (Elliot
& Harackiewicz, 1996).
An alternative set of
predictions may be derived from the approach-avoidance framework. Both
performance-approach and mastery goals are focused on attaining competence and
foster intrinsic motivation. More specifically, in performance-approach or
mastery orientations, individuals perceive the achievement setting as a
challenge, and this likely will create excitement, encourage cognitive
functioning, increase concentration and task absorption, and direct the person
toward success and mastery of information which facilitates intrinsic
motivation. The performance-avoidance goal is focused on avoiding incompetence,
where individuals see the achievement setting as a threat and seek to escape it
(Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996). This orientation is likely to elicit anxiety
and withdrawal of effort and cognitive resources while disrupting concentration
and motivation.
Personal Goals
Analysis
In recent years, theorists have increasingly relied on various
goal constructs to account for action in achievement settings. Four levels of
goal representation have been introduced: task-specific guidelines for
performance, such as performing a certain action, situation-specific orientations
that represent the purpose of achievement activity, such as demonstrating
competence relative to others in a situation, personal goals that symbolize
achievement pursuits, such as getting good grades, and self-standards and
future self-images, including planning for future goals and successes. These
goal-based achievement motivation theories have focused almost exclusively on
approach forms behavior but in recent years have shifted more toward avoidance
(Elliot & Sheldon, 1997).
Motivation is an important
factor in everyday life. Our basic behaviors and feelings are affected by our
inner drive to succeed over life's challenges while we set goals for ourselves.
Our motivation also promotes our feelings of competence and self-worth as we
achieve our goals. It provides us with means to compete with others in order to
better ourselves and to seek out new information to learn and absorb.
Individuals experience motivation in different ways, whether it is task- or
ego-based in nature. Some people strive to achieve their goals for personal
satisfaction and self-improvement while others compete with their surroundings
in achievement settings to simply be classified as the best. Motivation and the
resulting behavior are both affected by the many different models of
achievement motivation. These models, although separate, are very similar in
nature and theory. The mastery and performance achievement settings each have a
considerable effect on how an individual is motivated. Each theorist has made a
contribution to the existing theories in today's achievement studies. More
often than not, theorists build off of each other's work to expand old ideas
and create new ones. Achievement motivation is an intriguing field, and I find
myself more interested after reviewing similar theories from different
perspectives.
Source:
0 komentar:
Post a Comment