Psych

IntrinsicVersusExtrinsicMotivation.pdf

not overburdening them with excessive specifiers and subtypes. Thus, the revision process behind the ICD-11 is intended to enhance, at a minimum, the face validity of the classification.

However, the tension between clinical utility and the possibly greater use of "unspecified" when making a diagnosis contrasts with greater preci- sion of more specific codes provided by subtypes and other specifiers. Balancing this tension when using the ICD for all classification purposes con- tributes to overall data collection in regard to mortality (cause of death) and morbidity (current health problems) and enables countries to track information for public health purposes and to con- tribute to worldwide data collection.

Within the United States, the ICD-9-CM (1979) is the version used currently. Transition to the ICD- 10-CM has been delayed twice, with current implementation planned for 2015. With the cur- rently planned release of the ICD-11 in 2017, it is hoped that the regular updating process of the classification will bring the ICD-10-CM closer in alignment to the ICD-1 l so that there will not be such a long delay between publication of the 11th version by WHO and implementation within the United States. Efforts have historically been made to harmonize the ICD chapter on mental disorders with the latest version of the DSM, such that users of one classification will find noticeable similarities with the other.

Lynn F. Bufka and Nathan A. Tatro

See also Anxiety Disorders; Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders; Health Psychology; Mood Disorders; Neurodevelopmental Disorders; Personality Disorders; Psychopathology and Stress; Schizophrenia; Sleep Disorders

Further Readings

Goodheart, C. D. (2014). A primer for ICD-10-CM users: Psychological and behavioral conditions. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Reed, G. M. (2010). Toward ICD-11: Improving the clinical utility of WHO's International Classification of Mental Disorders. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 41(6), 457-464.

World Health Organization. (1992). The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders: Clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines.

Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motivation 475

Retrieved from http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/ en/bluebook.pd£

World Health Organization. (1993). The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders: Diagnostic criteria for research. Retrieved from http:// www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/GRNBOOK.pdf

INTRINSIC VERSUS EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION

For more than half a century, psychological scien- tists have used the term intrinsic motivation to refer to the phenomenon of individuals perform- ing an activity simply because they find the activ- ity interesting and enjoyable. At that time, a few psychologists had begun to realize that it is in people's nature to be active in relating to their social and physical environments, and intrinsic motivation is a manifestation of this inherent tendency.

As Harry Harlow showed 60 years ago, even nonhuman animals can be intrinsically moti- vated. The introduction of this concept into psy- chology was noteworthy because, prior to that time, motivation was addressed in terms of rein- forcement by the behaviorist theories of B. F. Skinner and C. L. Hull, who were very promi- nent. Thus, when discussed, intrinsic motivation was typically contrasted with extrinsic motiva- tion, which pertains to performing an activity in order to achieve separable consequences such as rewards, avoidance of punishment, or compliance with pressures or demands. This entry discusses the differences between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

In 1959, Robert White published a very impor- tant paper proposing that theories focused on pri- mary drives, such as hunger, thirst, and sex, with the corresponding reinforcers of food, water, and physical contact, as the source of all motivation were inadequate for explaining a range of behav- iors that included exploration and curiosity. White maintained that people have an innate need to interact competently with their environments, and this was the beginning of theorizing about intrinsic motivation, using the concept of competence, which is still considered an important component of intrinsic motivation.

476 Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motivation

Another essential component of intrinsic moti- vation is the experience of self-determination. When self-determined, individuals experience a full sense of willingness and choice about what they are doing, and they perceive the locus of cau- sality of their behaviors to be internal rather than external, which is the case when behavior is moti- vated by rewards and punishments. With this dis- tinction, in 1968, Richard de Charms suggested that when people perceive their behavior to be of their own choice, they enjoy and appreciate the activity more, compared with when they see them- selves as pawns being imposed on or moved by external circumstances.

Although neither White nor de Charms focused on intrinsic motivation per se in their writings, their works contributed substantially to the con- ceptualization of this basic human experience. Subsequently, in 1985, Edward Deci and Richard Ryan used the concepts of both competence and self-determination (or autonomy) in their formula- tion of intrinsic motivation. They argued that intrinsic motivation would flourish only when people experience the feelings of both efficacy and choice in their behaviors.

Are Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivations Additive or Interactive?

After psychologists recognized the two types of motivation, they wondered whether they were additive so that a person's total motivation for an activity would equal the sum of his or her intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. To test this possibility, Deci argued that if the types of motivation were additive, then rewarding people who were intrinsi- cally motivated for an activity would increase their total motivation. Subsequently removing the extrinsic-reward contingency would remove their extrinsic motivation for the activity and return them to the same level of intrinsic motivation they were at before the rewards were introduced.

Deci reported experiments showing that giving people tangible monetary rewards for engaging in an intrinsically motivated activity actually decreased their intrinsic motivation for the activity so that after the rewards were removed, their intrinsic motivation was lower than it had been before the rewards were introduced. In contrast, other experiments showed that positive feedback (sometimes called verbal rewards) enhanced

intrinsic motivation. Thus, tangible extrinsic moti- vators, such as money, tend to negatively interact with intrinsic motivation, whereas interpersonal, verbal rewards tend to be positively interactive with it. Authority figures often use tangible rewards, as well as threats of punishment, dead- lines, evaluations, and surveillance, to motivate people. The research has shown that these prac- tices tend to have negative effects on intrinsic motivation.

From these findings, Deci and Ryan introduced cognitive evaluation theory (CET), which later became a minitheory within self-determination theory (SOT). CET suggested that the extrinsic motivators such as monetary rewards and dead- lines tend to initiate a shift in the perceived locus of causality from internal (intrinsically motivated) to external, which leads people to experience themselves as less self-determined and thus less intrinsically motivated. With positive feedback, however, people experienced an affirmation of their competence, which led them to be more intrinsically motivated. Deci and Ryan further suggested that extrinsic motivators have two components: (a) a controlling component that limits people's self-determination or choice and undermines their intrinsic motivation and (b) an informational component that provides positive competence information without being limiting and enhances intrinsic motivation.

This general area of research has been contro- versial, and the finding that extrinsic rewards can decrease intrinsic motivation has been the source of considerable debate. However, a meta-analysis of 128 experiments showed that, in fact, the find- ing is robust and consistent and has now been widely accepted in psychology.

Other studies looked not only at specific events in an environment, such as the offer of a reward or provision of choice, but also at the general ambi- ence or climate within a setting such as a classroom or a workgroup and found that these settings can be characterized as either autonomy supportive or controlling and thus tend to be either enhancing or undermining of intrinsic motivation, respectively.

The Internalization of Extrinsic Motivation: Becoming More Autonomous

Intrinsic motivation is observed prevalently in early childhood, but as children grow older, part of

the socialization process requires them to adapt to social demands and responsibilities that are often not intrinsically motivating and yet are beneficial in terms of functioning effectively in the world. It is often the case that individuals carry out behav- iors less for the fun and enjoyment of doing so than for the instrumental value of the behaviors- for example, to attain a personal goal, to gain self- esteem, or to earn social approval. Engagement in such activities is thus extrinsically motivated, and the important question becomes whether the children can take on the regulation of these uninteresting behaviors in an autonomous or self-determined way.

SDT and, more specifically, another of its minitheories-namely, organismic integration the- ory ( 0 IT)-posi ts that being extrinsically mo ti va ted does not necessarily mean that people experience an external perceived locus of causality for their behaviors. They can internalize that type of motivation just as they can internalize beliefs and values from the external environment. Furthermore, people can internalize the motivation for a behav- ior to varying degrees, and it turns out that the more fully they internalize a motivation or the regulation of it, the more the behavior will be autonomous or self-determined when they enact it.

For instance, there is a difference between going to medical school because one's parents have pres- sured one to do so and pursuing medical school because one has internalized the value and impor- tance of helping others who are sick or injured. Although both cases involve an extrinsic motiva- tion to obtain a medical degree, the latter entails choosing to pursue the goal that one personally endorses, whereas the former reflects mere compli- ance with external demands. The two examples differ in the degree of autonomy one experiences while pursuing one's goals.

According to Deci and Ryan, internalization, or the transformation of motivation that was initially external into motivation that is internal, can become part of a person's integrated sense of self. They specified four types of extrinsic motivation that reflect different degrees of internalization. Specifically, OIT locates the four types of extrinsic motivation on a continuum of autonomy that is anchored on the nonautonomous end by amotiva- tion (i.e., lack of intentionality) and, on the highly autonomous end, by intrinsic motivation. The four types of extrinsic motivation, in order, are external

Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motivation 4 77

regulation, introjected regulation, identified regu- lation, and integrated regulation, each with distinct sets of associated processes and levels of perceived external-internal loci of causality.

External regulation is a category of extrinsic motivation that colloquially can be thought of as the carrot-and-stick approach, whereby behaviors are carried out mainly to receive rewards or avoid punishments. Such behaviors are entirely dictated by external demands and thus involve little control by the person, who is said to have an external perceived locus of causality (E-PLOC). External regulation is the type of motivation central to behaviorist theories, and it is what people most commonly refer to when they use the term extrinsic motivation.

The next type of extrinsic motivation is intro- jected regulation, which is a partial internalization that relies on internal pressures and controls rather than external ones. With introjected regulation, people tend to reward themselves internally with the experience of contingent self-esteem and to punish themselves with the feelings of shame and guilt based on the degree to which certain stan- dards are met. Thus, although it is not strictly a function of external demands, it is a function of internal demands that were initially external, and it entails little choice and autonomy. As such, it still has a fairly strong E-PLOC.

The other two forms of extrinsic motivation are identified regulation and integrated regulation. The first refers to the regulation of a behavior that the individual personally endorses and values and that is meaningful to his or her sense of self. Examples are students who study hard for the Graduate Record Examination (GRE) because they understand the importance of the test for their deeply valued career goals. Because identified regulation results when people have accepted a value and the corresponding regulatory process as their own, the ensuing behaviors are relatively autonomous. Holding such a value might, how- ever, conflict with other identifications, so the final type of extrinsic motivation involves integrating the value with other aspects of their integrated selves.

Once identified regulations are assimilated, they become integrated regulations, which are the most autonomous or self-determined form of extrinsic motivation. They signify a state of congruence and consistency in people's experiences and behaviors,

4 78 Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motivation

and as such, they share features with the self- determined experience of intrinsic motivation. Thus, behaviors for which the regulation is inte- grated have a high internal perceived locus of cau- sality. Integrated and intrinsic types of motivation are different, however, because integrated motiva- tion is based in the importance and value of the behaviors in people's lives, whereas intrinsic moti- vation is based in their interest and enjoyment of the behaviors.

Facilitating Organismic Integration: Basic Psychological Needs and the Social Context

Within SDT, the issue of enhancing autonomous motivation is addressed with the concept of basic psychological needs. Earlier, when considering the maintenance and enhancement of intrinsic motiva- tion, it was noted that satisfactions of the basic needs for autonomy and competence are essential. When it comes to the internalization of extrinsic motivation, the satisfaction of those two needs is also very important, but so is satisfaction of a basic need for relatedness. Stated differently, the inter- nalization process occurs naturally in optimal social contexts that facilitate growth and integra- tion by supporting satisfaction of the autonomy, competence, and relatedness needs. Such support is important during children's early years, and it con- tinues to be important across the contexts of their later lives.

Applications to Life Domains

SDT proposes that life flourishes through the culti- vation of intrinsic motivation and the full internal- ization of extrinsic motivation. Researchers have studied this premise across many domains, includ- ing parenting, health care, education, work organi- zations, athletics, video games, sustainability, and personal relationships. They have observed greater

well-being, enhanced performance, better problem solving, better physical health, and more satisfying close personal relationships in conditions that sup- port the satisfaction of basic psychological needs. Social contexts can provide such support by offer- ing choices, encouraging exploration, minimizing pressures and controlling language, offering a rationale when requesting a specific behavior, pro- viding meaningful feedback, understanding peo- ple's perspectives, and being respectful of them.

In contrast, ill-being, poorer performance, nega- tive affect, dissatisfaction, poorer physical health, and more superficial learning have been observed in contexts that thwarted satisfaction of the basic needs. Social contexts tend to do so by providing conditional regard, administering rewards and punishments, being critically evaluative, or prefer- ring controlling language.

Thuy-vy Nguyen and Edward L. Deci

See also Achievement Motivation; Drive and Motivation in the Brain; Emotion and Motivation; Employee Motivation; Motivation and Cognition; Motivation and Personality; Perception and Motivation; Reinforcement; Self; Self-Determination; Social Motives; Unconscious Motivation