Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
18 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Baumeister et al (2004) key points |
- attention to self-esteem has become a communal concern for Americans - thought it would reduce crime, teen pregnancy, drug abuse, etc. - self-esteem scores do not correlate with attractiveness ratings; there's a pattern in how people favorably rate themselves - this article emphasized objective measures when possible - people who regard themselves highly say they are popular and have higher quality friendships, but these assertions don't reflect reality - low self-esteem contributes to drug use - people with high self-esteem are significantly happier than others |
|
|
Expectancy Theory (Vroom, 1964) |
- central motivation theory - developed to predict individual levels of motivation - individuals will be motivated to put form if they believe their effort will result in good performance (expectancy), this performance will lead to secondary outcomes, such as rewards or recognition (instrumentality), and if they assign a high positive valence to the secondary outcome |
|
|
Erez 2002 results |
- positive affect expected to bring to mind more positive material in memory (valence), expected to increase individual's ability to arrange ideas in varied ways (instrumentality), and will lead people to see more of a link between levels of invested effort and performances that could result from them - results: participants in a positive mood state performed better, exhibited more persistence, tried harder, and reported higher levels of motivation than in a neutral mood - positive affect influences expectancy, instrumentality, and valence |
|
|
Kerr (1995) key points |
- we often reward one thing, but expect another behavior - example: society hopes teachers will not neglect teaching, but rewards them for research and publications - organizations hope administrators will pay attention to long run costs and opportunities, but reward systems pay off for short run sales and earnings - this happens because we: have a fascination with objective criterion, overemphasize highly visible behaviors, hypocrisy (failure to devise reward systems that have systematic evaluation), and emphasis on morality or equity than efficiency * can alter reward systems by first determining what behaviors are currently being rewarded |
|
|
Goal-setting theory |
- a goal is the object or aim of an action - individuals who set specific, difficult goals performed better than those who set general, easy goals - performance maximized when 1) they set specific, difficult goals that have high valence adn 2) understand what behaviors will lead to the goals and feel competent to do them |
|
|
Locke et al (2002) differences between VIE and goal setting theory |
- Goal setting theory appears to contradict Vroom's (1964) VIE theory, which states that the force to act is a multiplicative combination of VIE - expectancy is said to be linearly and positively related to performance, but because difficult goals are harder to attain than easy goals, expectancy of goal success would presumably be negatively related to performance - this contradiction is resolved by distinguishing between expectancy within vs. expectancy between goal conditions - when goal level is held constant, (assumed in VIA theory) higher expectancies lead to higher levels of performance, but across goal levels lower expectancies associated with higher goal levels are associated with higher performance |
|
|
Goal mechanisms |
Goals affect performance through four mechanisms: 1) direct attention and effort toward goal relevant activities and away from goal irrelevant activities 2) goals have an energizing function; high goals lead to greater effort 3) goals affect persistence; hard goals prolong effort 4) goals affect action indirectly by leading to arousal, discovery, and/or use of task-relevant knowledge and strategies |
|
|
Moderators of goal-performance relationship |
- strongest when people are committed to goals - self-efficacy enhances goal commitment - people need summary feedback for goals to be effective (goals + feedback more effective than goals alone) - task complexity: as complexity increases and strategies are not yet automized, goal effects are dependent on the ability to discover appropriate task strategies |
|
|
Goal setting theory (Locke & Lantham, 1990) |
Goal core --> performance --> satisfaction with performance and rewards --> willingness to commit to new challenges --> moderators Moderators --> goal core - performance relationship Mediators --> goal core - performance relationship |
|
|
Schmidt (2009) purpose |
- developed and tested a model of the interplay among goal difficulty, goal progress, and expectancy over time in resource allocation toward competing demands - dual goal expectancy: expectations for the eventual attainment of the goals for two tasks - propose that when attainment of both goals seen as probable (high dual-goal expectancy), increased time is allocated to the goal furthest from attainment; conversely, when an individual believes that reaching both goals is unlikely, resource allocation is biased toward the goal that is closest to being met *GST suggests care be taken in the assignment of difficult goals, because goals set too far beyond what individual believes to be attainable may fail to serve as a true guide for one's behavior |
|
|
Control theory |
proposes that discrepancies between desired and actual performance motivate individuals to take action to reduce discrepancies, such as increasing investment of time and effort, with larger discrepancies often resulting in greater responses (Bandura & Cervone, 1983) |
|
|
Schmidt (2009) results |
- results supported theoretical model - perceived likelihood of meeting both goals together moderated the relationship between relative goal progress and resource allocation - dual-goal difficulty was found to exert an important influence on multiple-goal self-regulation - did not influence total productivity across both tasks directly - cumulative demands placed by multiple difficult goals may exceed individuals' perceived capabilities and may lead to partial or total abandonment of 1 goal to ensure attainment of the other |
|
|
Intrinsic motivation vs. extrinsic motivation |
- Intrinsic motivation involves people doing anactivity because they find it interesting and derive spontaneous satisfaction from the activity itself. -- Extrinsic motivation requires an instrumentality between the activity and some separableconsequences such as tangible or verbal rewards, so satisfaction comes not from the activity itself butrather from the extrinsic consequences to which the activity leads. (Porter and Lawler, 1968 model - builds on expectancy-valence theory) |
|
|
Cognitive Evaluation Theory |
external factors (tangible rewards, deadlines, surveillance, etc.) tend to diminish feelings of autonomy, prompt a change in perceived locus of causality from internal to external, and undermine intrinsic motivation - feelings of competence and autonomy are important for intrinsic motivation - assumption that people need to feel autonomous and competent, and social-contextual factors promote feelings of autonomy and competence, and factors that diminish these feelings undermine intrinsic motivation * issues: activities at work are not intrinsically interesting, most people who work have to earn money, seems to imply have to focus on eitehr intrinsic motivation and minimize external or vice versa |
|
|
Self-determination theory |
- distinction between autonomous motivation and controlled motivation - autonomy: involves acting with a sense of volition and having the experience of choice (example: intrinsic) - being controlled involves acting with a sense of pressure, having to engage in actions - SDT postulates that autonomous and controlled motivation differ in terms of both their underlying regulatory processes and their accompanying experiences, and behaviors can be characterized based on the degree to which they are autonomous vs. contorlled - posits a self-determination continuum ranging from amotivation to intrinsic motivation |
|
|
4 types of intrinsic motivation in SDT |
amotivation (absence of internal regulation - lack of motivation) - 1) external regulation: contingencies of reward and punishment (controlled) - 2) introjected regulation: self-worth contingent on performance, ego-involvement (moderately controlled) - 3) identified regulation: importance of goals, values, and regulations (moderately autonomous) - 4) integrated regulation: coherence among goals, values and regulations (autonomous) intrinsic motivation: interest and enjoyment of the task (inherently autonomous motivation) |
|
|
Difference between SDT and other work motivation theories |
- focus on relative strength of autonomous vs. controlled motivation, rather than on the total amount of motivation - goal setting theory: SDT proposes autonomous motivation and intrinsic goals are better predictors of heuristic tasks, but don't differ in predicting algorithmic performance - maintains differentiating motivation and goals - action regulation theory: concept of decision latitude - equites with autonomy and suggests maximal motivation and action result when there is considerable decision latitude, which allows workers to set their own goals (SDT explicitly differentiates between types of motivation and views decision latitude to just be one factor) - |
|
|
motivation definition |
an internal state that induces a person toengage in particular behaviors. From one perspective, it has to do with thedirection, intensity, and persistence of behavior over time * direction: the choice of specific behaviors from a largenumber of possible behaviors * intensity: the amount of effort a person expends at doing atask * persistence: to the continuing engagement in a behavior overtime (Kanfer et al., 2008)
|
