Intrinsically motivated behaviors are engaged
in for their own sake- for the pleasure and satisfaction derived from their
performance. When intrinsically motivated, people engage in activities that
interest them, and they do so freely, with a full sense of volition and without
the necessity of material rewards or constraints (Deci & Ryan, 1985). The
child who reads a book for the inherent pleasure of doing so is intrinsically
motivated for that activity. Intrinsically motivated behaviors represent the
prototype of selfdetermination- they emanate from the self and are fully
endorsed.
Extrinsically motivated behaviors, on the other
hand, are instrumental in nature. They are performed not out of interest but
because they are believed to be instrumental to some separable consequence. In
early research on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (e.g., Deci, 1971), the
two forms of motivation appeared to be antagonistic, and thus extrinsically
motivated behaviors were assumed not to be self-determined. More recently,
however, theory and research have suggested that there are different types of extrinsically
motivated behaviors and that these types differ in the extent to which they
represent self-determined versus controlled responding (Ryan & Connell,
1989). Deci and Ryan (1985) identified four types of extrinsic motivation:
external, introjected, identified, and integrated forms of regulation. Their
argument was built around the concept of internalization.
Internalization. Internalization is a proactive process through
which people transform regulation by external contingencies into regulation by internal
processes (Schafer, 1968). For example, a boy who is not interested in learning
the capitals of states would not be intrinsically mo'tivated to do so, and his
learning would require contingent consequences such as praise from the teacher.
Internalization is the process through which the regulation of the boy's
geography learning could become internal and no longer require external
contingencies. In self-determination theory, internalization is viewed as a
motivated process. We believe (a) that people are inherently motivated (out of
the three basic needs) to internalize and integrate within themselves the
regulation of uninteresting activities that are useful for effective
functioning in the social world and (b) that the extent to which the process of
internalization and integration proceeds effectively is a function of the
social cointext.
Optimal internalization results in regulations'
being fully integrated into the self, although there are also less optimal
forms of internalization (Ryan, 1991). Self-determination theory posits that
the four types of extrinsic
motivation result from the internalization
process's having been differentially effective. The resulting egulatory styles thus fall at different points
along an autonomy continuum that describes the extent to which they have been
iinternalized and integrated.
External regulation. External regulation refers to behaviors for
which the locus of initiation is external to the person, for example, the offer
of a reward or the threat of a punishment. A student who does an assignment
for teacher's praise or to avoid parental
confrontation is externally regulated. The behavior is performed because of an
external contingency, and these contingencies are considered the loci of
initiation and regulation.
External regula.tion represents the least
self-determined form of extrinsic motivation.
lntrojected regulation. Taking in but not accepting a regulation as one's
own is the! basis of introjected regulation. Such regulation involves internalized
rules or demands that pressure one to behave and are buttressed with threatened
sanctions (e.g., guilt) or promised rewards (e.g., selfaggrandizement). Introjected
regulations, although within the person, are not part of the integrated self
(Deci & Ryan, 1991), so behavior regulated by introjects is not considered
self-determined. A student who gets to class on rime to avoid feeling
like a bad person is regulated by introjects. The student has not identified
with the regulation, so it has not become part of the self, and punctuality is
not really by choice. Instead, it results from internal coercion. In short,
although introjected regulation is internal to the person, it bears more
resemblance to external control than to selfdetermined forms of regulation
because it involves coercion or seduction and does not entail true choice.
Identified regulation. Identified regulation occurs when the person has
come to value the behavior and has identified with and accepted the regulatory
process. With identification, the regulatory process has become
more fully a part of the self, so the person
does the activity more willingly. Behaviors thus regulated are considered more
autonomous or selfdetermined than are behaviors regulated by external
contingencies or introjects, because identification allows the person to feel a
sense of choice or volition about behaving. An example would be a student who
willingly does extra work in mathematics because the student believes it is
important for continuing to succeed at mathematics. The motivation is extrinsic
because the activity is performed primarily because of its usefulness or instrumentality
for the goal of improving math performance and succeeding in future endeavors,
rather than because it is interesting. Nonetheless, the behavior is relatively
self-determined because the student does it willingly, for personal reasons,
rather than external pressure.
Integrated regulation. The most developmentally advanced form of extrinsic
motivation is integrated regulation. In this case the regulatory process is
fully integrated with the individual's coherent sense of self; that is, the
identifications are reciprocally assimilated with the individual's other values,
needs, and identities. For example, a teenager may have one identification with
being a good student and one with being a good athlete.
It is quite possible that these two
identifications could seem conflicting to the student and thus cause tension,
even though both are valued by the student. Only when the two identifications
have become integrated, when
they have become harmonious with each other and
with the rest of the student's sense of self, will the internalization process
be complete. When regulatory processes are integrated, behavior is an
expression of who the individual is-of what is valued by and important to the
individual.
Behaviors regulated by integrated processes are
fully self-determined and appear primarily in adult stages of development. Integrated
regulation bears some relation to intrinsic motivation because both are forms
of autonomous self-regulation. Accordingly, the qualities that are associated
with intrinsically motivated behavior - such as behaving willingly, being
creative, and displaying conceptual or intuitive understanding- can be used as
objective markers of the extent to which anextrinsic regulation has become
fully integrated. However, intrinsic motivation and integrated regulation are
different. Intrinsic motivation is characterized by interest in the activity
itself, whereas integrated regulation is characterized by the activity's being
personally important for a valued outcome.
Recently, various questionnaires have been
constructed to assess regulatory styles (e.g., Blais, Sabourin, Boucher, & Vallerand,
1990; Ryan & Connell, 1989; Vallerand, Blais, Brittre, & Pelletier,
1989; Vallerand & O'Connor, 1991). These questionnaires differ in
the age of subjects toward whom they are geared, in the domains to which they
refer, and in how many of the six motivational constructs (viz., amotivation,
external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation, integrated
regulation, and intrinsic motivation) they assess. Still, the various scales
have the same theoretical underpinnings and have yielded complementary results.
The two scales most relevant to the current
discussion of motivation in education are the Academic Self-Regulation
Questionnaire (ASRQ; Ryan & Downloaded By: [EBSCOHost EJS Content
Distribution] At: 21:48 28 May 2008 Connell, 1989) and the Academic Motivation
Scale (AMS; Vallerand et al., 1989). The ASRQ was designed primarily for
students in late elementary and middle sch~ools. It includes four subscales
measuring the external, introjected, and identified forms of extrinsic
motivation and also intrinsic motivation. It focuses on students' motivation to
do school-related activities (thus, it does not assess amotivation) and asks
them to endorse the degree to which various reasons are true. Integration was
not included in the ASRQ because it was assumed these students were too young
to have achieved a sen:s~eo f integration with respect to these activities. The
scale presents a stem followed by several reasons, for example "I do my homework
because": ccI'll get in trouble if I don't" (external); "1'11
feel bad about myself if I don't do it" (introjected); "It's
important to me to do my homework" (identified); and "I enjoy doing
my homework" (intrinsic).
The AMS (Varllerand et al., 1989) also assesses
external, introjected, and identified regulation and intrinsic motivation, but
also measures arnotivation. The AMS was designed for use with college students
and uses a format similar to that used by Ryan and Connell(1989) in the ASRQ.
In the following sections, we review studies that have used these
questionnaires as well as other methods relevant to self-determination.
0 comments:
Post a Comment