Motivation and Emotions
Gordon Vessels’ Lecture Notes for PSY205 Unit 3, 2-26-05
I. The Nature of Motivation
Why did you decide to enroll in Psychology 206?" In order to answer this question and all
"why" questions, you must explore your motivations and possibly your emotions. Various
psychophysiological processes are involved when you are being pushed or pulled in one
direction or another. Your motivation is in fact directional or goal-directed, and it can be called
different things besides motivation such as wants, needs, instincts, compulsions, and drives. Our
focus when studying motivation must be on the internal and external factors that cause and
regulate our goal-directed actions. My initial "why" question probably has more than one
answer. These answers may trace behavior to the situation, personal factors, or some
combination of situational and personal factors. Let’s see if we can come up with some possible
answers for why Bernard Goetz shot several teenagers on a subway in New York.
Goetz entered a NY subway at about 1:00 P.M. and took a seat close to four black teenagers who
were standing. The four talked loudly until one of them turned to Goetz and said, "How are ya?"
He then boldly walked over to Goetz and demanded five dollars. Goetz said, "I have $5 for each
of you," then pulled out a gun and shot all four. Goetz could have followed the lead of other
passengers by moving away from the teens either before or after the demand. He could have
given the kid $5 or told him he didn't have any money. Why did he make the choice that he did?
More than likely his prior experiences with black teenagers in the subway were unpleasant. It is
also likely that others in his family were intolerant of blacks or racially prejudiced. Goetz may
have been a loner who tended to dwell on others’ vices or deviance, and may have been critical
of authorities for failing to prevent intimidation in the subway. There may have been a more
recent stressor in his life such as being fired from his job. When we investigate the wants and
needs that took him in the direction he chose, we are investigating his motivation. It gets rather
complex to say the least. Below is a less-than-exhaustive list of factors that may have been
relevant.
Biological Factors:
-
The instinct to aggress that we all share as human beings
Testosterone and adrenaline levels, which may have been high
Relative physical size and strength as appraised by him
Arousal level and type such as physical symptoms of anger or stress
General state of health
Experiential Factors:
-
History of consequences for being the aggressor and/or the victim of aggression
History of observing black teenage gang members in the subway
His parents’ disciplinary methods which may have including whippings he thought these
boys needed
Treatment by co-workers on the job and by classmates as a student, particularly African
American
1
-
Recent losses or setbacks or demeaning experiences that may have caused him to feel
powerless
Personality/Temperament Factors:
-
Level of impulsivity
Inclination to high arousal or quickness to anger and explosiveness
Need for harmony among people
Attraction to violence
Mental health including possible obsessive-compulsive tendencies that may have lead
him to obsess about worthless teens and their need to be taught a lesson
Cognitive Factors:
-
Ability to define and solve conflicts
The ability to take the perspective of others and to empathize with others affectively and
intellectually
Social perceptiveness or lack thereof
Self-Concept
Self-assessment of power or powerlessness
Recall of being beat up by a gang previously
Some type of unconscious push to unload
His assessment of the actual threat posed by the teens
Affective Factors:
-
Fear of harm to self
Empathetic visualization of possible harm coming to others including women and
children
Fear of embarrassment or actual embarrassment from being taunted by these teens
The thrill of battle or danger, which may have been enjoyable for him
Hatred toward teen punks or black people
This list should include enough to put to rest any thoughts you may have had about being a
forensic psychologist. You could not pay me enough.
As this list and my PPT slides convey, motives can be categorized as biological (drives, instincts,
physical needs), behavioral, cognitive, social, and affective. We can also identify types of
motivation such as achievement, power, self-preservation, altruism, situational, cognitive
consistency, etc. These categories correspond to various theories of motivation that we need to
explore.
So working inductively, we can define motivation as an internal state (sometimes described as a
need, desire, or want) that activates behavior and thoughts and gives them direction (Huitt,
2002). The words “motivation” and “emotion” come from the Latin word “movere,” which
means “to move” (Forsyth, 2004). Emotion, a subjective sensation experienced as a type of
psycho-physiological arousal, is different from motivation in that it has no goal attached.
2
II. Theories of Motivation
A. Instincts: (can be seen as a subcategory of biological theories of motivation). Instinct
theories of motivation were among the first and were popular in the early 20th century (e.g.
McDougall, 1908). They began to decline in popularity in 1930 with the introduction of
Behaviorism. (See slide # 11)
1. What is an instinct? (Forsyth, 2004)
It is inborn.
It is involuntary.
Behavior resulting from it follows a fixed pattern.
It is characteristic of an entire species.
It is genetically determined and develops without practice or learning.
Usually it is activated by a specific releasing stimulus (cue) in environment.
It aids in adaptation in most cases.
2. A 1920s list of instincts included fear, mating, parental love, construction, combativeness,
food-seeking, curiosity, jealousy, sociability, etc.
3. Through his ethological studies, Konrad Lorenz continued to study instinct after this theory
fell out of favor in the 1930s). He listed four primary drives (hunger, reproduction, fear,
aggression) that shape human behavior patterns. In his book On Aggression (1963) he argued
that warlike behavior and fighting in human beings was innate. But he also thought this
could be modified by the environment and controlled if the basic instinctual needs of human
beings were understood and satisfied. Lorenz subscribed to a “good for the species” or
“survival of the group” view. This popular notion has been by a molecular-level emphasis on
the survival of genes (Dawkins, 1976) not group survival that occurs.
4. Sociobiology (Dawkins, 1976) proposes that the organism's fundamental goal is not merely
survival. Rather, the fittest succeed in passing on the maximum number of genes to the next
generation. Having offspring is a good way to ensure the survival of an organism’s genes.
Caring for offspring is part of this “selfish gene” tendency to seek survival at all costs. Even
if the parent dies in the process of protecting its young, its genes continue through its
offspring. Darwin thought the fittest animals survived the longest; Hamilton thought the
fittest maximized the survival of their genes through future generations.
B. Drive Reduction Theory (Hull, 1943):
1. We act to reduce the push exerted by drives or internal stimuli that represent biological
needs. For Hull, reinforcement is the primary factor in learning, but drive reduction or need
satisfaction is a critical initiating variable that ultimately leads to reinforcement.
2. Deficiency needs — animals have biological requirements for life (e.g. body temperature
98.6, water in our cells, food in our stomachs
3. Drive ― when needs are not satisfied the individual will experience unsettling arousal or tension.
3
4. Drive-reduction ― humans are motivated to reduce this tension through physiological and
behavioral activity. The goal is homeostasis.
5. Hull over-emphasized drive reduction since sometimes individuals try to increase tension or
arousal. They ride roller coasters, drive fast, watch scary movies, sky-dive, and seek all
kinds of unpredictable new experiences. Drive reduction cannot explain any of this?
6. What is needed in addition is a “drive induction” theory.
C. Optimum Arousal-Level Theory (Focuses on Internal Stimuli):
1. Arousal is a term used for a general state of psycho-physiological activation or stimulation
2. Homeostasis: Hull drew on the concept of homeostasis, but he stressed reduction far more
than activation. People seek out stimulation and try to increase their level of arousal if too
low: boredom, sensory isolation, etc. They seek an optimal level, and will increase or
decrease their level of arousal to reach a preferred level. Thayer (1989, 1978) identified four
dimensions that he grouped into the two higher-order constructs of energetic arousal and
tense arousal: energetic arousal is associated with approach behavior, and tense arousal is
associated with avoidance behavior.
3. How much arousal? That depends on your goal. The Yerkes Dodson Law presents an
inverted U-shaped relationship between cognitive efficiency and arousal.
4. Are you a sensation seeker? Zuckerman's Sensation-Seeking Scale (1991):
1A. I would like a job that requires a lot of traveling.
1B. I would prefer a job in one location.
2A. I would like to try parachute-jumping.
2B. I would never want to try jumping out of a plane, with or without a parachute.
3A. I like to dive or jump right into the ocean or a cold pool.
3B. I enter cold water gradually, giving myself time to get used to it.
4A. I prefer people who are emotionally expressive even if they are a bit unstable.
4B. I prefer people who are calm and even-tempered.
D. Incentive Theory (Behavioral and Focuses on External Stimuli):
Instinct, drive, and arousal theories stress the push of internal mechanisms. But in many cases
we are pulled by our desire to achieve a goal (Forsyth, 2004).
1. An incentive is in evidence when external stimuli can motivate behavior through the
anticipation of pleasure/comfort or the elimination of displeasure/discomfort.
2. The motivational power of an incentive depends on the (a) value of the stimulus we seek, and
(b) expectancy of achieving it by taking action. Julius Rotter’s (1954) Expectancy-Value
Theory places cognition between stimulus and response.
4
3. Classical conditioning states that biological responses to associated stimuli energize and
direct behavior.
4. Operant conditioning proposes that the most important factor is consequences: the
application of reinforcers provides the incentives to increase behavior in the future; the
application of punishers introduces disincentives that lead to decreased behavior.
5. Social learning theory suggests that modeling (imitating others) and vicarious learning
(watching others have consequences applied to their behavior) are important motivators
(Bandura, 1986).
6. Achievement motivation theory fits best into this category: low achievers seek low and high
difficulty or challenge; high achievers seek moderate challenge. However, incentives that
involve the usual reinforcers and schedules preclude the freedom and control that improve
morale and productivity among workers. Workers need input into decisions, challenges,
cross-training, praise, a sense of responsibility, and the knowledge of being held accountable.
E. Social cognition theory (Bandura, 1986) grew out of the simpler social learning theory
(Bandura’s emphasis on “self-efficacy” links this with incentive theories).
Social cognition theory proposes among other things reciprocal determination. In this view, the
environment, an individual's behavior, and the individual's characteristics (e.g., knowledge,
emotions, cognitive development) influence and are influenced by each other (Huitt, 2001).
Albert Bandura highlights self-efficacy (the belief that a particular action is possible and that the
individual can accomplish it) and self-regulation (the establishment of goals, the development of
a plan to attain those goals, the commitment to implement that plan, the actual implementation of
the plan, and subsequent actions of reflection and modification or redirection).
F. Cognitive theories of motivation (3 Types):
1. Cognitive Dissonance theory is similar to “disequilibrium” in Piaget’s theory of cognitive
development. CD theory states that when there is a discrepancy between two beliefs, two
actions, or between a belief and an action, we will act to resolve these discrepancies and
distort the facts to our advantage in the process. Beliefs about self can be involved.
2. A second approach is Attribution Theory (Heider, 1958; Weiner, 1974). Every individual
tries to explain success or failure through "attributions," which are either internal or external,
and either under one’s control (effort) or out of one’s control (luck). Attribution theory is
concerned with answering the question, “Why do people do what they do?” It is a theory
concerned with how people formulate explanations about causes of their behavior and that of
others. These causal explanations assume that behavior is caused by factors either within or
outside of the person. People attribute causal explanation to atypical behavior because they
want to make sense of it.
◘ Weiner’s theory focuses on achievement (see slides).
◙ It identifies (a) ability, (b) effort, (c) task difficulty, and (d) luck as causes to which
achievement or lack thereof is attributed.
5
◙ Attributions are scaled along three dimensions: (a) locus of control, (b) stability, and
(c) controllability.
◙ Causal attributions affect reactions to success or failure (e.g. a perceived internal
locus of control brings a positive feeling of success or and a willingness to take
credit).
3. A third cognitive approach is Expectancy Theory (Vroom, 1964). It proposes that
Motivation = Perceived Probability of Success (Expectancy) times Connection of Success
and Reward (Instrumentality) times Value of Obtaining Goal (Value). Since the three factors
of expectancy, instrumentality, and value are multiplied by each other, a low value in one
will result in a low value in motivation. If an individual doesn't believe he can be successful,
or does not see a connection between his activity and success, or does not value the results
of success, then motivation is absent (Huitt, 2002).
G. Humanistic Theories of motivation (relatively eclectic in Maslow’s case).
1a. Abraham Maslow is known for his Hierarchy of Needs theory. He proposed that human
beings are motivated by unsatisfied needs and that certain lower-level, or deficiency needs,
must be satisfied before activities that could satisfy higher-level needs can be seriously
pursued.
1b. According to Maslow, there are several types of needs (physiological, safety, love, and
esteem) that must be satisfied before a person can act unselfishly. He called these needs
deficiency needs. As long as we are motivated to satisfy these needs, we are moving towards
growth and toward self-actualization.
1c. Maslow's Metamotivation: Self actualizing people are motivated differently than those who
are not self-actualizing. Maslow calls this Metamotivation or B-Motivation, meaning Being
Motivation. Self actualizers are not preoccupied by reducing tensions but by the desire to
enrich their lives. The motivation to self actualize is intrinsic – actions for the sake of the
actions rather than for some external reward.
1d. Maslow's D Motivation or Deficiency Motivation: D-Motivation rectifies deficiencies and
the physical, emotional, and cognitive tension or discomfort associated with them – biologic,
psychological gratification through lower level needs.
1e. Maslow’s Needs in Detail: Extracted from http://web.utk.edu/~gwynne/maslow.HTM
6
◘ Physiological Needs: Physiological needs are the very basic needs such as air, water,
food, sleep, sex, etc. When these are not satisfied we may feel sickness, irritation, pain,
discomfort, etc. These feelings motivate us to alleviate them as soon as possible to
establish homeostasis. Once they are alleviated, we may think about other things.
◘ Safety Needs: Safety needs have to do with establishing stability and consistency in a
chaotic world. These needs are mostly psychological in nature. We need the security of a
home and family. However, if a family is dysfunction, i.e., an abusive husband, the wife
cannot move to the next level because she is constantly concerned for her safety. Love
and belongingness have to wait until she is no longer cringing in fear. Many in our
society cry out for law and order because they do not feel safe enough to go for a walk in
their neighborhood. Many people, particularly those in the inner cities, unfortunately, are
stuck at this level. In addition, safety needs sometimes motivate people to be religious.
Religions comfort us with the promise of a safe secure place after we die and leave the
insecurity of this world.
◘ Love Needs: Love and belongingness are next on the ladder. Humans have a desire to
belong to groups: clubs, work groups, religious groups, family, gangs, etc. We need to
feel loved (non-sexual) by others, to be accepted by others. Performers appreciate
applause. We need to be needed. Beer commercials, in addition to playing on sex, also
often show how beer makes for camaraderie. When was the last time you saw a beer
commercial with someone drinking beer alone?
◘ Esteem Needs: There are two types of esteem needs. First is self-esteem which results
from competence or mastery of a task. Second, there's the attention and recognition that
comes from others. This is similar to the belongingness level, however, wanting
admiration has to do with the need for power. People, who have all of their lower needs
satisfied, often drive very expensive cars because doing so raises their level of esteem.
"Hey, look what I can afford-peon!"
◘ Self-Actualization: The need for self-actualization is "the desire to become more and
more what one is, to become everything that one is capable of becoming." People who
have everything can maximize their potential. They can seek knowledge, peace, esthetic
experiences, self-fulfillment, oneness with God, etc. It is usually middle-class to upperclass students who take up environmental causes, join the Peace Corps, go off to a
monastery, etc.
2a. Glasser’s Choice Theory:
2b. Glasser's Basic Needs:
need to survive and reproduce
need to belong, love, share, cooperate
need for power
need for freedom
need for fun
2c. All basic needs are produced by genetics and biology. Everyone is motivated, BUT how
needs are satisfied is not universal. We all have a picture album in mind where we store
images of what we want and what we have. We have an ideal world in mind. The picture of
the ideal may change. Some people have an unrealistic picture. If what we want and what we
7
get is equivalent, then little frustration occurs. The greater the frustration, the greater the
motivation to act (this explains why people fly into action).
H. Psychoanalytic Theory:
The psychoanalytic theories of motivation propose a variety of influences. Freud (1990)
suggested that all action or behavior is a result of potentially harmful internal, biological instincts
classified into two categories: life (sexual) and death (aggression). Freud's students broke with
him over this concept. For example, Erikson proposed that interpersonal and social relationships
are fundamental; Adler proposed that the need for power is basic; Jung proposed that
temperament and the search for meaning is basic.
I. Eclectic Theories (includes Maslow and Bandura):
Leonard et al. (1995) proposed 5 factors as the sources of motivation: (1) Instrumental
Motivation (rewards and punishers), (2) Intrinsic Process Motivation (enjoyment, fun), (3) Goal
Internalization (self-determined values and goals), (4) Internal Self Concept-based Motivation
(matching behavior with internally-developed ideal self), (5) External Self Concept-based
Motivation (matching behavior with externally-developed ideal self). Individuals are influenced
by all five factors, though in varying degrees that can change in specific situations.
Factors one and five are external. Individuals who are instrumentally motivated are influenced by
immediate actions in the environment (e.g. operant conditioning); individuals who are selfconcept motivated are influenced by their constructions of external demands and ideals (e.g.,
social cognition). Factors two, three, and four are internal. Intrinsic means the specific task is
interesting and provides immediate internal reinforcement (e.g., cognitive or humanistic theory).
The individual with a goal-internalization orientation is task-oriented (e.g., humanistic or social
cognition theory) whereas the person with an internal self-concept orientation is influenced by
individual constructions of the ideal self (humanistic or psychoanalytic theory) (Huitt, 2002).
III. The Nature of Emotions
A. What is emotion? Like so many psychological phenomena, emotion is easily recognized but
hard to define (Forsyth, 2004). Most theories hold that emotion is a complex entity with
many components: physiological (autonomic nervous system), cognition, sensory input,
behavioral correlates.
1. Features or components:
◘
◘
◘
◘
affective: feeling of positive or negative
cognitive: label attached to feeling, perception of cause of feeling, appraisal of situation
behavioral: outward manifestation of emotion in facial expressions and behavior
physiological: impact on the body and neurophysiological indicators of which we are not
consciously aware
2. Describing Emotions
◘ Affective level
8
◙ pleasantness-unpleasantness
◙ level of activation: weak-strong
◘ Cognitive level
◙ label or name associated with the emotion (Plutchik's model of emotions)
◙ appraisal of the situation
◘ Behavioral level
◙ Nonverbal cues
◙ Examples from Ekman's work
◙ Facial feedback
◘ Physiological level
◙ CNS: limbic system and cortex
◙ PNS: somatic and autonomic, sympathetic and parasympathetic (off)
◙ Sympathetic & Parasympathetic: heart rate is faster/slower; pupils dilate/constrict;
digestion stops/starts; sweating increases/decreases
3. What good is emotion?
Psychological theories suggest that emotions (a) prepare us for action (e.g. fear preps us to run),
(b) shape our behavior (emotion can be reinforcing), (c) regulate social interaction, and (d)
facilitate communication. Emotions are usually inseparable from the communication of them.
Most people do not have a "poker face," and we generally find a person's emotional response to
be obvious. Knowing how someone feels will help us evaluate how they will act.
IV. Theories of Emotion
A. James-Lange Theory:
1. Common sense: Environmental Event ---> Psychological ---> Physiological
2. James-Lange: Environmental Event ---> Physiological ---> Psychological
William James states, “My theory ... is that the bodily changes follow directly the perception of
the exciting fact, and that our feeling of the same changes as they occur is the emotion. Common
sense says we lose our fortune, are sorry, and weep; we meet a bear, are frightened, and run; we
are insulted by a rival, are angry, and strike. The hypothesis here to be defended says that this
order of sequence is incorrect ... and that the more rational statement is that we feel sorry because
we cry, angry because we strike, afraid because we tremble ... Without the bodily states
following on the perception, the latter would be purely cognitive in form, pale, colorless,
destitute of emotional warmth. We might then see the bear, and judge it best to run, receive the
insult and deem it right to strike, but we should not actually feel afraid or angry.”
B. The Cannon-Bard Theory:
9
1a. Cannon's critique (1929) of James-Lange:
◘
◘
◘
◘
different emotions are accompanied by the same physiological (visceral) state
visceral changes are too difficult to notice to be used as cues
they are too slow to be a source of emotions, which erupt very quickly
back to common sense theory, localized seat of emotion in the thalamus, emotional
sensations from cortex would release its usual inhibition of the thalamus, which in term
produced autonomic CNS discharges (problem: no s specific center responsible for
emotion)
2b. This theory proposes that emotion-eliciting stimuli are relayed simultaneously to the cortex
and organs of the sympathetic nervous system. When stimuli reach the thalamus, this part of
the midbrain activates a physical reaction and an emotional response. The thalamus is a
crossroads for sensory pathways and it simultaneously signals the autonomic nervous system
and the cerebral cortex. But the rest of the limbic system, particularly the hypothalamus and
amygdala, are now known to play a role in emotional responses. A physiological response
and an emotional reaction may not be simultaneous.
C. Cognitive Appraisal: Schachter and Singer Theory:
1a. Schachter and Singer maintain that we don't automatically know when we are happy, angry,
or jealous. Instead, we label our emotions by considering situational cues. This labeling
process depends on two factors (Forsyth, 2004).
◘ Some element in the situation must trigger a general, nonspecific arousal marked by
increased heart rate, tightening of the stomach, and rapid breathing.
◘ people search the situation for cues that tell us what has caused our emotion.
1b. Schachter and Singer told subjects they were part of studying a vitamin supplement called
Suproxin. The men were asked if they were willing to take the drug. Those who consented
were injected with either epinephrine or a placebo. Epinephrine (adrenaline) is released by
our hormonal system whenever we face a stressful situation. It increases blood pressure,
heart rate, and respiration. The men who received the epinephrine were more physiologically
aroused than those who received the placebo (Forsyth, 2004).
1c. “Schachter and Singer manipulated subjects' interpretations of their physical sensations.
They told some of the epinephrine-injected subjects that even though the drug wasn't
harmful, side effects were quite common: they might feel flushed, their hands might shake,
and their hearts might pound. The other subjects, in contrast, were given no information at
all about the effects of the drug. Schachter and Singer reasoned that once the epinephrine
kicked in, their subjects would begin to search for the cause of their arousal. People who had
been told that the drug would arousal them should have assumed that the drug was causing
their hands to shake and their heart to pound. But if they weren't warned about the drug's
effects, then they would be more likely to interpret their arousal as an emotion” (Forsyth,
2004, Cognitive View).
1d. “What kind of emotion would these uninformed subjects experience? Schachter and Singer
believed that their reaction would depend on the available situational cues. They therefore
10
manipulated this variable as well. They arranged for their subjects to wait for the Suproxin's
effects in a small room with another person. This individual was one of Schachter and
Singer's accomplices, and he was trained to behave in either a euphoric or angry fashion. The
euphoric confederate clowned around during the 20 minutes, doodling on scratch paper,
playing a game of "basketball" with wadded up balls of paper, making and flying a paper
airplane, building a tower out of file folders, and playing with a Hula Hoop. The angry
confederate, in contrast, became increasingly agitated during the 20 minutes. The subjects
were asked to complete questionnaires that contained very personal questions. The
accomplice, after loudly criticizing questions that requested information about childhood
diseases, father's income, and family members' bathing habits and psychiatric adjustment,
flew into a rage at the question "How many times each week do you have sexual
intercourse?” (Forsyth, 2004).
1e. “Schachter and Singer observed and coded the actions taken by each subject, and also asked
them to describe their emotion state. As they had predicted, the physiologically aroused
subjects who hadn't been told about the drug's side-effects responded with emotions that
matched the confederate's actions. If they were aroused and hadn't been expecting the
arousal, then they felt happy when their fellow subject was happy, but angry when their
fellow subject was angry. Forewarned subjects and un-aroused subjects who received a
placebo did not display any pronounced emotion. Also, the subjects in a special control
condition--people who had been given epinephrine but had been misinformed about its
possible effects--also displayed the emotions enacted by a euphoric confederate” (Forsyth,
2004).
D. Opponent Process Theory:
Richard Solomon’s Opponent Process Theory states that once a particular emotional reaction has
been activated, the brain tries to regain homeostasis by initiating the opposite reaction.
REFERENCES:
Bandura A. (1977a). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Bandura A. (1977b). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84: 191-215.
Bandura A. (1978). The self-system in reciprocal determinism. American Psychologist, 33:344358.
Bandura A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura A. (1989). Social Cognitive Theory. IN: Annals of Child Development (Vol 6, p1-60.
(Vasta R, ed). Greenwich, CT: Jai Press LTD.
Dawkins. R. (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11
Erikson, E. (1993). Childhood and society. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
Forsyth, Donelson (2004). Motivation and emotion: lecture notes. Retrieved from
http://www.has.vcu.edu/psy/psy101/forsyth/moemox.htm
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Hull, C. (1943). Principles of Behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Huitt, William (2001). Motivation to learn: An overview. Educational Psychology Interactive.
Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved [date], from
http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/motivation/motivate.html
Izard, C. (1990). Facial expressions and the regulation of emotions. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 58, 487-498.
James, W. (1997). The varieties of religious experience (Reprint ed.). New York: Macmillan
Leonard, N., Beauvais, L., & Scholl, R. (1995). A self-concept-based model on work motivation.
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, August. Retrieved:
December 1999, from http://www.cba.uri.edu/Scholl/Papers/Self_Concept_Motivation.HTM.
Lorenz, K. (1963). On Aggression. San Diego: Harcourt Brace.
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.
McDougall, William (1908, 2003). Introduction to Social Psychology, 30th Edition. Dover
Publications.
Rotter J. (1954). Social Learning and Clinical Psychology. Prentice-Hall.
Rotter, J. B. (1982). Social learning theory. In N. T. Feather (Ed.), Expectations and actions: Expectancyvalue models in psychology (pp. 241-260). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Thayer, R. E. (1989). The biopsychology of mood and arousal. New York. Oxford.
Thayer, R. E. (1978). Toward a psychological theory of multidimensional activation (arousal).
Motivation and Emotion, 2, 1-34.
Vroom, V. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
Weiner, B. (1974). Achievement motivation and attribution theory. Morristown, NJ: General
Learning Press.
12
Zuckerman, M. (1991). Psychobiology of personality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13