Spring 2014 Psych Human Motivation Final

Front 1

Drive theory includes two main concepts
What are they?

Back 1

Habit - a learned response strengthened when that response is followed by a reward

Drive - energizes or activates the learned structure

Front 2

Expectancy Value Theory

Back 2

Behavior depends on the perceived likelihood that it will lead to the goal and on the subjective value of that goal.

Decisions are made based on Subjective Expected Utility (SEU) - the expected personal value associated with each choice of behavior

Expectancy and Value relate MULITPLICATIVELY

Front 3

SEU

Back 3

Subjective Expected Utility -

the expected personal value associated with each choice of behavior

Front 4

Aspiration Levels --

goal discrepancy and attainment discrepancy

Back 4

goal discrepancy - if aspiration level (goal) is higher than last performance, then the discrepancy is positive. If it is lower, the discrepancy is negative

attainment discrepancy - the difference between the stated goal and the number of successes - affective reactions are related to the discrepancy - individual will probably feel bad if the desired level of achievement is not reached.

Front 5

Failure in aspiration level experiments -

Back 5

failure generally results in psychological withdrawal from the task - defensive reaction

These findings have led some to consider aspiration level more an index of defensiveness than of goal striving

Front 6

Kurt Lewin's Resultant Valence Theory

Back 6

characterizes level of aspiration as a choice (conflict) situation in which one chooses the alternative with the greatest resultant approach force.

Front 7

Lewinian notion of potency (in resultant valence theory) -

Back 7

potency refers to subjective expectancy or certainty - similar to probability.

There is a potency associated with success and a potency linked with failure.
Low potency could also be an indication of greater psychological distance, while a high potency could indicate that few instrumental actions are necessary to reach the goal

Front 8

Lewin's Resultant Valence theory FORMULA--

Back 8

Resultant Force = (Vas x Pos) - (Vaf x Pof)

Resultant force is approach force towards the goal minus the force away from the goal -- therefore a larger resultant force is a larger approach force toward the goal.

The alternative that has the greatest resultant approach force is expected to be selected.

Front 9

Lewin's resultant valence theory -- VALENCE --

Back 9

Anticipated success has positive valence, potential failure has negative valence.

As the level of difficulty of the task increases, so does the attraction of success, while the negative valence of failure is greater the easier the task.

Front 10

TAT:

Back 10

Thematic Apperception Test
developed by Murray.

Subjects are shown pictures to which they are asked to respond with stories. Complex scoring scheme with 11 categories, looking for achievement imagery.

Front 11

Atkinson's Theory of Achievement Motivation

Back 11

built upon the idea of individual differences (unlike the behavior theorists - who researched common principles of human behavior)

Atkinson felt that achievement behavior is the resultant of an emotional conflict between hopes for success and fears of failure. Conflict between approach and avoidance tendencies - possibility of success/pride and possibility of failure/shame

Front 12

Atkinson's Theory of Achievement Motivation - FORMULA:

Back 12

Ts = Ms x Ps x Is

Tendency to approach achievement-related goal = Motive for success (need for achievement) x subjective probability of success x incentive value of success

Ms - is a stable or enduring disposition - capacity to experience pride in accomplishment

Ps - cognitive goal expectancy or anticipation that an instrumental action will lead to the goal

Is - is an affect - "pride" - inversely related to Ps, so greater pride (incentive) is experienced following success at a difficult task than after success at an easy task. Incentive (pride) goes up as probability of success decreases

Front 13

Atkinson - what metaphor does he fall under?

Back 13

Theory of Achievement Motivation
falls under god like metaphor (person as a decision maker)

Atkinson also empirically studied why people lean towards tasks of intermediate difficulty

Front 14

Who is the clearest proponent of the "person as scientist" metaphor?

Back 14

George Kelly - considered the average person as an intuitive scientist, having the goal of predicting and understanding behavior

Psychologist is no longer "higher" than the "naive" subject

Front 15

George Kelly's fundamental postulate:

Back 15

an individual's life is guided by how he or she construes the world - no one is the victim of his biography

Front 16

George Kelly's corollaries:

individual corollary
dichotomy corollary
range corollary
experience corollary

Back 16

Individual corollary: persons differ from each other in their construction of events

dichotomy corollary: a person's construction system is composed of a finite number of dichotomous constructs (honest and sincere vs. dishonest and insincere)

range corollary: a construct is convenient for the anticipation of a finite range of events - ie., the construct tall-short is appropriate for the anticipation of play on a basketball court but is irrelevant in predicting an individual's honesty

experience corollary: a person's construction system varies/changes/is altered

Front 17

Attribution Theory - who was the founder?

Back 17

Fritz Heider - also developed balance theory

Front 18

Fritz Heider - what are his theories?

Back 18

Attribution theory and balance theory

Front 19

Attribution theory - what is it?

Back 19

Individuals are scientists trying to understand the causal structure of the world. Humans are motivated to find out why things happen and to develop perceptions of causality

Front 20

Compensatory schema

Back 20

"try" can compensate when there is low "can" - high effort can make amends for low ability and/or a difficult task

Front 21

multiple necessary vs. multiple sufficient causal rules

Back 21

multiple necessary - AND situations - both hunger and availability of desirable food are required to eat

multiple sufficient - OR situations - either hunger or availability of desirable food are required to eat

Front 22

Hedonic bias (or error)

Back 22

also known as self-serving attribution bias, ego enhancement, ego defensiveness, and beneffectance

refers to people's tendency to take more credit for success that they do responsibility for failure. Maximizes the pleasure of success and minimizes the pain of failure

Front 23

Properties of causes

Back 23

locus: internal vs. external
stability: stable vs. unstable
controllability: controllable vs. uncontrollable

Front 24

Expectancy Principle:

Back 24

changes in expectancy of success following an outcome are influenced by the perceived stability of the cause of the event.

If the outcome is ascribed to a stable cause, then that outcome will be anticipated with increased expectancy in the future.

If the outcome is ascribed to an unstable cause, then the expectancy of that outcome may be unchanged or it may be different from the past (unstable causes are unpredictable)

Front 25

Differences between GUILT and SHAME

Back 25

Guilt is INTERNAL; cause is from something internal and CONTROLLABLE; produces a desire to make amends; failure is ascribed to lack of EFFORT

Shame is EXTERNAL; cause is from something internal and UNCONTROLLABLE; produces a desire to withdraw; failure is ascribed to lack of ABILITY

Front 26

Difference between role of emotion as motivator in Expectancy Value theory and Attribution theory

Back 26

In Expectancy Value theory, emotion might be considered a "pull" while attribution embraces a "push" conception. EV guided by anticipated emotions while Attribution guided by experienced emotions.

EV - stimulus --> emotional anticipation --> action
Attribution - stimulus --> attribution --> emotional reaction --> action

Front 27

difference between personal fitness and inclusive fitness

Back 27

personal fitness - Darwinian classical theory - ultimate goal is personal survival

inclusive fitness - Theo Wilson's Sociobiology - ultimate goal is genetic survival

Front 28

Formula for Lewinian Theory

Back 28

Behavior = f (Person, Environment)

Force = f (Tension x Properties of Goal object) / e - psychological distance from goal

Front 29

Hullian / Drive Theory Formula

Back 29

Strength of Motivation = Drive x Incentive x Habit