Motiuation:History of the Concept
strategies
of goal setting,and goal implementation
that areeasyto perform.
Seealso:AcademicAchievementMotivation. Developmentol Action Theory:Psychological;
Activity
Theory:Psychological;
AttitudesandBehavior;
Automaticityof Action,Psychology
of, ControlBehavior:
Psychological
Perspectives;
Group DecisionMaking,
ol IntrinsicMotivation,PsychoSocialPsychology
logy of; Self-regulation
in Adulthood
Bibliography
Atkinson J W 1957 Motivational determinantsof risk-taking
behavior. PsychologimlReuiew64: 359-'72
Bandura A 199'1SeU:elhcac),;The Exerci.teo/ Control. \N.H.
Freeman,New York
Bargh J A, Chartrand T L 1999The unbearableautomaticityof
being. American Psvthologist 54: 462-79
Brunstein J C. SchultheissO C, Grässmann R 1998 Personal
goals and emotional well-being: The moderating role of
motive dispositions.Journal oJ Personalityand Social Psycholog1,75:49+508
Cantor N, Fleeson W 1994 Social intelligenceand intelligent
g o a lp u r s u i t :A c o g n i t i v es l i c eo f m o t i v a t i o n .I n : S p a u l d i n gW
(ed.) Nehraska Sympo.siumon MotiDation. University ol
N e b r a s k aP r e s s L
, i n c o l n ,N E , V o l . 4 l , p p . 1 2 5 7 9
Carver C S, ScheierM F 1998 On the Selt'-regulation
oJ Beharioar. Cambridge University Press,Carnbridge,UK
Dweck C S 1999 SeU-theories.Tlteir Role in Motiuation, Personalitt', anct Derelopmenl.Psychology Press.Philadelphra,
PA
Emmons RA 1996 Striving and feeling: Personal goals and
subjectivewell-being.In: Gollwitzer P M, Bargh J A (eds.)
The Psychology ol Action: Linking Cognition and Motiaalion
to BehaL:ior.
Guilford Press,New York, pp. 313-37
G o l l w i t z e rP M 1 9 9 0A c t i o n p h a s e sa n d m i n d - s e t sI.n : H i g g i n s
E T, Sorrentrno E M (eds.) Handbook of Motitation and
Cognilion; Foundationso/ Sotial BehaL:ior.Guilford Press,
New Yolk, Vol. 2, pp. 53-92
Gollwitzer P M 1999Implementationintentions:Strong effects
o[ simple pldns.Ameritan Psvthologist54: 493-503
Gollwitzer P M, Bargh J A 1996 The Psvthologl, o/ Action:
Linking Cognitionand Motiuation to A.tion. Guilford Press,
New York
HeckhausenH l99l Motitotion and lrtron. Springer-Verlag,
Berhn
H i g g i n s E T 1 9 9 7 B e y o n d p l e a s u r ea n d p a i n . A m e r i c a n P s y - chologist52: 1280 1300
K l i n g e r E 1 9 7 5 C o n s e q u e n c eosf c o m m i t m e n tt o a n d d i s e n gagementfrom incentives.P,sychologital
Retiew 82: | 25
Kuhl J. BeckmannJ 1994VolitionanclPersonality;Action tersu:;
State Orientotion.Hogrele & Huber, Seattle,WA
McClelland D 1985 Human Motiualiox. Scott, Foresman,
G l e n v i e w ,I L
McClelland D 1995 Achievement motivation in relation to
achievement-relatedrecall. performance.and urine flow, a
marker associatedwith releaseofvasopressin.Motiuationand
Emotion 19: 59-76
Oettingen G 2000 Expectancyeffectson behavior depend on
s e l f - r e g u f a t o rtyh o u g h t .S o c i a lC o g n i t i o nl 8 : l 0 l - 2 9
R y a n R M , S h e l d o nK M , K a s s e rT M . D e c i E L 1 9 9 6A l l g o a l s
arenot createdequal:An organismicperspectiveon the nature
of goals and their regulation.In: Gollwitzer P M, Bargh J A
(eds.) 7"fte Psvchologv of Action; Linking Cognition and
Motiuation to Behauior.Guilford Press,New York, pp. 7-26
Taylor S E, Pham L B, Rivkin I D, Armor D A 1998Harnessing
the imagination: Mental simulation, self-regulation, and
coping. Ameritan Psy-chologi.rt53: 429-39
Werner B 1992Human Motiüation. Sage,Newbury Park, CA
Wright R 1996Brehrn'stheory of motivation as a model of effort
and cardiovascularresponse.In: Gollwitzer P M, Bargh J A
(eds.) Tlre Psy-chologv ol Action: Linking Cognition and
MotiDationto Bahauior.Guilford Press,New York,pp.424-53
P. M. Gollwitzer and G. Oettineen
Motivation: History of the Concept
Evolutionary theory, the study of learning, and the
psychoanalytic study of mental illness have been
committed to see motivation as a primary cause of
behavior, and this is also true of behavioral biology
and physiological psychology, as they prefer to think
in terms of homeostasis(Cofer and Appley 1964).
When hunger occurs, for instance,behavior is instigated (e.9., finding and eating food) that is instrumental to rectifying the imbalance caused by tissue
needsand deficits. The named theoretical perspectives
have barricaded the simple insight that behavior can
occur under externally applied forces as well (e.9., a
shove).Even more importantly, the physical structure
of the organism, its sensoryand perceptual capacities,
its cognitive and motor abilities, and so forth, qualify
as causal factors. Even habits, once formed, can be
seenas such.
Research on motivation has recognized early on
that motivation can only be one of the many causesof
behavior, and this extends to the causation of affect
and cognition as well. Accordingly, the leading question became: What are the aspects of cognition,
affect, and behavior that benefit most from a motivational analysis?Traditionally, the following issues
have beenaddressed:First, there is the questionofthe
lacilitation and energizationofcertain responses.This
issue has been analyzed by the classic proponents of
learning theory (Hull 1943, Spence 1956) who suggestedthat motivational processesas such (assumedto
be rooted in general drive or arousal states) do not
necessarilycontrol or guide specificforms of behavior
but may at times invigorate innate or learned associativetendencies.Second,thoughts, feelings,and
actions are often characterized as guided, directed,
goal-oriented,persistent,or purposive.Such qualities
relate to making choices,but also to short-term or
long-term efforts in implementing the choices made.
10109
Motiuation: History o.f the Conc'ept
Researcherslike Atkinson (1957) and McClelland
(1955) locused on this issue and suggesteda motivational analysis.
To demonstrate how the conceot of motivation has
changed in history, this article describeshow two
central issues(i.e., basic needs and action control)
have been addresseddifferently by the traditional and
the modern psychologyof motivation.
1,
Basic Human Needs
Whereaslearning theorists, following the lead of Hull,
conceived of need as a general, content-free drive,
personality psychologistswere eager to put content
into the concept of need. Sigmund Freud was rather
parsimonious by only suggestingtwo basic needs,
namely the life and the death instinct. McDougall
(1932) listed l8 basic needswhich he referred to as
instincts (e.g., curiosity, sell-assertion,submission).
Murray's (1938) Explorations in Personality contains a
catalog of 20 psychogenic needs (e.g., need for nurturance, need for succorance) and Maslow's (1954)
Motiuation and Personality proposed a hierarchy of
needs whereby the lower need categories related to
deficiency needs (e.g., hunger, safety) and the higher
ones to growth needs(e.9., need to achieve,need to
realizeone's potential).
The named approachesexcelledin generatingsophisticated definitions and descriptions,but did not
provide reliable instruments lor needassessment.
They
also failed to answer the question of which of the many
needsare activated in a given situation and how such
activation processesrun off. Moreover, they did not
explore the origins of individual differencesin the
strengthofthese needs.In later years,Atkinson (1957)
and McClelland (i985) addressedtheseproblemswith
respect to the need for achievement and the power
motive.
Still, the question remains: Which of the many
conceivable human needs is the most basic?
Baumeister and Leary (1995) have recently raised this
issue by applying criteria such as universality, nonderivativeness,
satiation,and substitution.According
to their analysis, the need to belong in the sense of
forming and maintaining strong, stableinterpersonal
relationshipsis suggestedto be a most basic need.
However,this needseemsto be in tensionwith another
basic need, the desire to distinguish oneself and be
different lrom others, as people are found to compete
even with their intimates when it comes to performing
well on dimensions that are of high personal relevance
(Tesser 1988). Indeed, the need lor high self-esteem
has been suggestedas the ultimate human motive,
becauseit buffers fear of death which is a consequence
of humans being consciousof their mortality. Such
awarenessengenders abject terror that needs to be
managed as it could paralyze the ability to act
(Pyszczynskier al. 1997).
1 0 11 0
Recentresearchon individual differencesin terms ol
motivational orientations has replaced the need (motive) construct with constructs that describe a general
goal orientation, such as personal projects, personal
strivings, life tasks, or identity goals. Such personal
strivings (Emmons 1996) are more limited in scope
(e.g., be a honest person) and can be characterizedin
terms of expectanciesol success,complexity, high vs.
low level of abstraction, avoidance vs. approach
orientation, degreeofconflict betweeneach other, and
integration vs. fragmentation. The named parameters
of personal strivings have been observed to relate to
measuresof psychological and physical well-being.
2,
Action Control
Early theoriesportrayed the human as a machine-like
reactive organism compelled to act by internal and/or
external forces beyond our control (e.g., instincts,
needs,drives, incentives,reinforcers, etc.). Prototypical theories are the psychoanalytic theory of Freud,
Hull's learning theory (and the reformulations by his
students),or Lewin's field theoretical approach. These
theoriesimply that if onejust pushedthe right button,
motivation would result. There is no room for conscious reflections and attemDts towards self-resulation. Instead, motivational lorces transmit th-eir
energy outside of awareness,establishing a state of
balance or equilibrium (referred to as arousal reduction, self-preservation,or need satisfaction).
More modern theories construe human beings as
all-just and all-knowing final judges of their actions.
Expectancy-valuetheories (e.g., Atkinson 1957) assume that people choosegoals in a rational way, based
on the comprehensiveknowledgeof the probability of
goal attainment and the goal's expectedvalue. It is
proposedthat the subjectiveprobability olsuccessand
the incentivevalue of having performed a task (i.e.,
pride or shame) conjointly affect task choice, both
variablesbeing influenced by the perceiveddifficulty of
the task. Elaborations of this model (Heckhausen
I 99 1) added further expectation-relatedconcepts(e.g.,
action-outcome expectancies),and differentiated various aspectsof the incentive value (e.g., extrinsic side
effects).Attribution theories (e.g., Weiner 1992) prooose that the motivational determinantsof a oerson's
tehavior are causal explanations of prioi actron
outcomes. People are seen as amateur scientistswho
systematically explore the causes of their behavior.
The type ofcauses discoveredare expectedto affect a
person's readiness to engage in these or related
behaviors by influencing affect and expectations.
More recently, the motivational importance of
control beliefs has been analyzed. According to
Bandura's (1997) self-efficacytheory, self-efficacious
individuals hold the firm belief that they possessthe
potential to execute (i.e., control) the kinds of
behaviors that a given task demands. People acquire
Motiuation: History of the Concept
such beliefs by reflecting on their own relevant past
from distractions by making plans on how to deal with
behaviors,observing the behavior of similar others,
them, or they can plan the details (when, how, and
being evaluatedby significantothers (e.g.,teachers), where) of the initiation and execution of the goaland observingtheir own physiologicalreactionswhen
directed behavior ahead of time, so that any
challenged by a given task. High self-efficacybeliefs
potentiallydisturbing self-states
(e.g.,being tired) can
are associatedwith choosing aspiring goals, exerting
no longer interfere (Gollwitzer 1999).People can also
strong effort to attain thesegoals, and persistingin the
step up their efforts when hindrances are encountered
face of obstaclesand hindrances.
and turn to substitute goals if increasedeffort still fails
Present theories of motivation go beyond conto guarantee goal attainment. Other effective action
ceptualizing humans as all-just and all-knowing. Hucontrol strategies relate to the regulation of one's
man beings are construed as flexible strategists.The
emotions, the perceived attractiveness of the goal,
focus is on the different tasks a person has to perform
and to creating an environment that offers good
when transforming wishes into actions (Gollwitzer
opportunities lor making progress toward goal
1990).When choosinggoals,peopletry to live up to the
attainment (Kuhl and Beckmann 1994).
ideal of being an all-knowing and all-just person by
This recent revival ofresearch on the self-reeulation
processingall the availableinformation in an impartial
of goal pursuit (Mischelet al. 1996)is reminisient not
manner. However, when the implementation of an
only of the mentalists' analysisof willing (James 1890),
already set goal is at issue,people are determined,
but also of German will psychology (Ach 1935,Lewin
become partial, and the desirability and feasibility are
1926) before the heyday of behaviorism. William
seenin the most positive light.
James pointed out that any self-regulation either has
Recent research on goals focuses on the deterto do with strengthening a weak tendency to perform
minants and processesof goal settingas well as goal
a desiredbehavior(i.e.,issuesof the obstructedwill) or
implementation. With respect to goal setting, for
with weakening a strong tendency to perform an
instance, it has been discovered that people who
unwanted behavior (i.e., issuesof the explosivewill).
construetheir self as an ideal which they intrinsically
James'analysisof willing is basedon the assumption
desire to attain, set themselvespromotion goals
that behavior can potentially be regulated by a
focusing on establishingand keeping positive outperson's resolutions (or intentions, subjective goals),
comes, whereas people who construe their seif as an
even though in certain situations and at certain times
ought which they feel compelled to reach, set themthis may be difficult.
selves prevention goals focusing on avoiding and
Kurt Lewin's experimental work on the willful
getting rid of negative outcomes (Higgins 1997).
control of behavior also offers ideas on how such
Moreover, people can regulate the process of goal
control may come about, and the same is true for the
settingin a more or lessproductivemanner,by the way
research of Narziss Ach. Lewin suggestedthat goals
they think about the future outcomes they want to
assigna valenceto objectsand eventsin people's social
attain. When the desiredfuture is mentally contrasted
and nonsocialsurroundings.In Lewin's example of a
with negativeaspectsof impeding reality (e.g.,effectpersonwho intendsto mail a letter,a mail box entices
ively mastering a project is mentally contrasted with
the person to deposit the letter much as food enticesa
obstaclesstanding in its way), relevant expectationsof
hungry person to eat. As needs can be satisfied by
successfullyrealizing one's fantasiesbecomeactivated
various types of behaviors which may all substitute for
and used. Accordingly, people form goal commiteach other in reducing need tension (e.g., eating fruit,
ments in a rational manner (i.e., lorm strong goal
vegetables), many different goal-directed behaviors
qualify for satisfying the quasi-need associatedwith
commitmentswhen expectationsof successare high,
and leave the field when probabilities of successare
a set goal. Lewin's tension state metaphor thus
low). When people only dream about positive future
effectivelyaccountslor the flexibility ol goal striving.
outcomesor solelyruminateabout the negativereality,
Ach's approach to the analysis of willing was
however, respectivegoal commitments are moderate
different. He assumed that the linking in one's mind
and expectancy-independent(Oettingen 2000).
of an anticipated situation to a concrete intended
'determination'
Regarding the determinants of successfulgoal imbehavior creates what he called a
plementation, how goals are framed makes an imwhich in turn automatically triggers the intended
portant difference. For instance, when achievement
action when the soecifiedsituation is encountered.The
goalsare framed as learninggoals(i.e.,goalsgearedat
strength of the äetermination was not assumed to
trying to learn more about how one can successlully
relate to the importance of the person's intention or
carry out the task at hand) as compared to pergoal, but rather to the degree of concretenesswhen
formance goals (i.e., goals geared at trying to find out
specifying the situation and to the intensity of the act
how capable one is), failure experiencesare coped with
of willing. For Ach, concepts like need relate to the
more effectively and thus people are more likely to
importance of goals and thus were assumed to be
reach their goals (Dweck 1999). It also matters how
critical for choosing between goals, whereas the
goal pursuit is regulated by the individual. For
implementation of set goals was an issue of willing.
instance, people can protect an ongoing goal pursuit
The suggesteddistinction betweenmotivational issues
10111
Motiuation; History of the Conc'ept
of goal choice and volitional issuesof goal lmplementationis reflectedin recentresearchon goals
that distinguishes
betweengoal setting and goal
implementation.
See also'.Action Planning,Psychologyol Attributional Processes:Psychological;Behaviorism;Behaviorism,
Historyol CognitivePsychology:
History;
FreeWill and Action; Mental Representations,
Psychology of; Motivation and Actions, Psychology
of; Motivation, Learning,and Instruction;Motivation, Neural Basis ol PersonalityStructure;
PersonalityTheories;Self-regulation
in Adulthood;
Self-regulation
in Childhood
Higgins ET, Kruglanski AW (eds.) Social Psychology;
Handbookol Ba.sitPrint'iple.r.
Guilford Press,New York, pp.
329 60
Murray H A 1938Explorationsin Personalit-r,.
Oxford University
Press.New York
OettrngenG 2000 Expectancyeffectson behavior depend on
self-regulatorythought. Social Cognitionl8: 101,29
PyszczynskiT A, GreenbergJ, Solomon S 1997Why do we need
what we need?:A terror managementperspectiveon the roots
of human socialrnotivation.Psvchologiul Inquiry 8: l-20
Spence K W 1956 Behauior Theory and Conditioning. Yale
University Press,New Haven, CT
TesserA 1988Toward a self-evaluationmaintenancemodel of
social behavior. In: Berkowitz L (ed.) Aduancesin Experr
mental Social Psychologv.Academic Press,New York, Vol.
21, pp. l8l-22
Weiner B 1992Human MotiDation.Sage,Newbury Park, CA
P. M. Gollwitzerand G. Oettinsen
Bibliography
Ach N I935 Analy'sedes Willen.s.Urban und Schwarzenberg,
Berlin
A t k i n s o n J W 1 9 5 7 M o t i v a t i o n a l d e r e r m i n a n t so f r i s k - t a k i n g
behavror.PsythologicalRetien,64: 359 12
Bandura A 1997 Sel/-efficaty-'.
Tlte Exertise o/ Control. W.H.
Freeman.New York
BaumeisterR F, Leary M R 1995The needto belong:Desirefor
interpersonalattachments as a fundamental human motiv ation. Psychologit al B ullet in ll7 : 497-529
Cofer C N, Appley M H 1964Motiuation: Theorv-and Research.
Wiley, New York
Dweck C S 1999 Self-theories.Their Role in Motiuation. Personalit,-,and Deuelopmenr.
PsychologyPress,Phtladelphia
E m m o n s R A 1 9 9 6 S t r i v i n g a n d f e e l i n g :P e r s o n a lg o a l s a n d
subjectivewell-being.In: Gollwitzer P M, Bargh J A (eds.)
The Psvthologvof Action: Linking Cognitionand Motiuation
to Behauior.Guilford Press,New York
Gollwitzer P M 1986Action phasesand mind-sets.In: Higgins
E T, Sorrentino E M (eds.) Handbook of Motiaation and
Cognition: Foundations of Social Behauior. Guilford Press,
New York, Vol. 2
Gollwitzer P M 1999Implernentationintentions:Strong effects
of simple plans. Anreritan Psychologist 54: 493-503
HeckhausenH l99l Motitation and ,4r'tion.Springer-Verlag,
Berlin
Higgins E T 1997 Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psyc h o l o g i s5t 2 : 1 2 8 0 - 1 3 0 0
Hull C L 1943Printiple.tol Behauior.Appleton-Century,New
York
James W 1890 The Principles of Psychologv.Holt, New York
Kuhl J, Beckmann J 1994 Volition and Personality: Action
Ver.rusState Orientotion.Hogrefe and Huber, Seattle,WA
Lewin K 1926 Vorsatz. Wille und Bedürlnis. Psychologische
For.schung
7: 330 85
Maslow A H 1954Motit:utionand Per.sonalll.r-.
Harper & Row,
New York
McClelland D C (ed.) 1955 Studiesin Mottuarion. AppletonC e n t u r y ,N e w Y o r k
McClelland DC 1985 Human Motbatlon. Scott, Foresman,
Glenview,IL
McDougall 1932 The Energies of Men; A Studv of the Fundamentalsof Dynamit P.sychologv.
Methuen, London
M i s c h e l W , C a n t o r N . F e l d m a n S 1 9 9 6 P r i n c i p l e so f s e l f r e g u l a t i o n :T h e n a t u r e o f w i l l p o w e r a n d s e l f - c o n t r o l I. n :
Motivation, Learning,and Instruction
In popularlanguage,
motivationis equatedwith goaldirectedbehaviorand is, as such,easilyunderstood.
However, educationalresearcherswho wanted to
includethisseemingly
clearconstructinto theirmodels
oflearningandinstructionsoondiscovered
that it is a
blanketterm which refersto a variety of interrelated
self-perceptions
and affects,including outcome expectations,self-emcacy,
goalorientation,goal setting,
perceptionof control,interest,self-concept
of ability,
goal intentions,goal striving,persistence,
and effort
expenditure.Each of thesefacetsof the motivation
constructhas beenintensivelyresearched
within its
own conceptualniche,a situationwhich has resulted
in a kaleidoscopeof overlapping constructs and
complementary measurementinstruments. Quite
clearly,the presenceof too many motivation-related
constructs
hashinderedtheintegrationofthe concept
withinmodelsof learningandinstruction.
Thisarticle
beginswith a brief historicaltour of the motivation
theoriesthat are relevantto the studyof learningand
instruction.Next, somerecentdevelopments
in motivation researchwill be discussed.Thesedevelopmentshavebeeninstrumentalin givingmotivationthe
prominentplacein pedagogical
practiceand instruction modelsthat is longoverdue.
I.
A BrieJHistory oJ'Motiuation
An examinationof the history of motivation reveals
that the significance
of the motivationconstructwas
acknowledged
in the 1940sand 1950s,wheninterpretationproblems
plaguedthestudyof goalachievement.
Researchers
arguedthat individualshaveaccessto a
101 2
Copyright O 2001ElsevierScienceLtd. All rightsreserved.
InternationalEncyclopedia
of the Social& BehavioralSciences
ISBN: 0-08-043076-7
International
Encyclopedia
of the Social&
BehavioralSciences
Editors-in-Chief
Neil J. Smelser
Centerfor AdvancedStudy in the Behavioral Sciences,Stanford, CA, USA
PaulB. Baltes
Max Planck Institutefor Human Development,Berlin, Germany
Volume 15
i :
r
l .
:': '.*]
. :'.
*i.-
200r
ELSEVIER
AMSTERDAM-PARIS-NEW
YORK-OXFORD-S
HANNON-S INGAPORE-TO KYO