Lecture 1:
People have a general motive to seek safety and a general motive to advance oneself.
There is a manipulation to arise the motivation to seek safety and to arise the motivation to
advance oneself:
Regulation focus theory:
- Regulatory focus theory → behavior is represented at different levels of
abstraction. Higher levels provide reasons for lower levels.
Here there are two different motivations/end points: promotion and prevention.
We perform an evaluation of the status quo (“actual self”) and compare it with how it should
be:
- Promotion focus: ‘ideal self’
- Prevention focus: ‘ought self’
There is a motivation to reduce the discrepancy between the actual self and ideal/ought self.
It does not only matter if people have promotion or prevention motivation, it is also about
how people implement this. People are not only motivated to gain pleasure and to avoid
pain, but also by how they can gain pleasure and avoid pain. Motivation is higher when
people choose the ‘’right’’ means:
- Promotion focus fits with approaching gains
- Prevention motivation fits with avoiding losses
The motivation is stronger when there is a fit, but non-fit situations exist as well.
, - Gain: ‘If you pass the assignment, you get bonus points’
- Non-gain: ‘If you fail the assignment, you don’t get points’
- Non-loss ‘If you pass the assignment, you won’t lose points’
- Loss: ‘If you don’t pass the assignment, you lose points’
Imagine that you want to obtain a 9, how you feel when you do get it is the top left, when you
don’t get it you get the emotions on the bottom left. Imagine that you want to avoid a fail
grade, when you achieve this you feel the emotions on the top right, when you don’t you feel
the emotions on the bottom right.
This has implications for feedback. Negative feedback is more motivating when there is
prevention focus.
Comparison with control theory:
There is an evaluation of the status quo (‘’the actual self’’) and a comparison with how it
should be:
- Promotion focus: ‘’ideal self’’ → increase discrepancy
- Prevention focus: ‘’ought self’’ → reduce discrepancy
Motivation arises to reduce the discrepancy between the actual self and ideal/ought self.
Measurement & activation of regulatory focus:
1. Self-report questionnaires
2. Analysis of the context (e.g: task type)
3. Frame out outcome focus (winning vs not losing something)
4. Reminder of what your ideals are vs what one thinks he/she ought to do
5. Approach vs avoidance movements
Effects of regulatory focus on risk taking:
People with a promotion focus are more inclined to take risks than people with a prevention
focus:
,Note: in 2004 bonds were safer, but less profitable investments than stocks.
Goals:
- Goals → a mental representation of a(n un)desired outcome. ‘I want to
reach/achieve X’
- Achievement goal → the goal has competence as a desired outcome
There are three definitions of competence:
1. Did you meet objective task standards? → absolute competence
2. Did you increase your competence? → intrapersonal competence
3. Did you demonstrate competence? → normative/interpersonal competence
These can be clustered into two types of achievement goals:
1. Mastery → intrapersonal and absolute competence
2. Performance → interpersonal competence
There is a difference between goal and purpose.
The purpose is how you define your competence (e.g: to get admired, to dominate others,
etc.)
There is a 2x2 framework for achievement goals:
- Mastery-approach ‘I want to master a task’, ‘I want to do better than before’
- (Mastery-avoidance ‘I want to avoid doing worse than before’, ‘I want to avoid not
mastering the task’)
- Performance-approach ‘I want to do better than others’
- Performance-avoidance ‘I want to avoid doing worse than others’
Mastery avoidance was additionally not studied. It is however important (e.g: to cope with
the consequences of decline when getting older or injured).
The consequences of achievement goal adoption are:
1. Performance quality → no effects
2. Task enjoyment & intrinsic motivation → low for performance-avoidance
In one study there was no performance standard (the number of Nina’s hidden in the image
was unknown). They had 90s to solve the Nina cartoon puzzle. The instructions trigger a
mastery goal or performance-avoidance of performance-approach goal. The dependent
variable is intrinsic motivation, which was free task engagement.
The performance did not differ across conditions.
, Performance goals are not necessarily bad for free-task engagement Only
performance-avoidance leads to lower task engagement.
Conclusion: competition focused on positive outcomes may not impair intrinsic motivation.
3. Learning from mistakes/disagreement → high for mastery
4. Cooperation with others → high for mastery, but only when competence is low:
Growth mindset:
We have implicit theories of personality (e.g: about intelligence, moral character, etc.).
These implicit (lay) theories are core assumptions about the malleability of personal
qualities.
- Entity theory (fixed mindset) ←→ incremental theory (growth mindset)
This has implications for a broad array of important variables:
- Goals that you adopt
- The importance of effort
- Attribution of adversity
- Reactions to adversity
People have a general motive to seek safety and a general motive to advance oneself.
There is a manipulation to arise the motivation to seek safety and to arise the motivation to
advance oneself:
Regulation focus theory:
- Regulatory focus theory → behavior is represented at different levels of
abstraction. Higher levels provide reasons for lower levels.
Here there are two different motivations/end points: promotion and prevention.
We perform an evaluation of the status quo (“actual self”) and compare it with how it should
be:
- Promotion focus: ‘ideal self’
- Prevention focus: ‘ought self’
There is a motivation to reduce the discrepancy between the actual self and ideal/ought self.
It does not only matter if people have promotion or prevention motivation, it is also about
how people implement this. People are not only motivated to gain pleasure and to avoid
pain, but also by how they can gain pleasure and avoid pain. Motivation is higher when
people choose the ‘’right’’ means:
- Promotion focus fits with approaching gains
- Prevention motivation fits with avoiding losses
The motivation is stronger when there is a fit, but non-fit situations exist as well.
, - Gain: ‘If you pass the assignment, you get bonus points’
- Non-gain: ‘If you fail the assignment, you don’t get points’
- Non-loss ‘If you pass the assignment, you won’t lose points’
- Loss: ‘If you don’t pass the assignment, you lose points’
Imagine that you want to obtain a 9, how you feel when you do get it is the top left, when you
don’t get it you get the emotions on the bottom left. Imagine that you want to avoid a fail
grade, when you achieve this you feel the emotions on the top right, when you don’t you feel
the emotions on the bottom right.
This has implications for feedback. Negative feedback is more motivating when there is
prevention focus.
Comparison with control theory:
There is an evaluation of the status quo (‘’the actual self’’) and a comparison with how it
should be:
- Promotion focus: ‘’ideal self’’ → increase discrepancy
- Prevention focus: ‘’ought self’’ → reduce discrepancy
Motivation arises to reduce the discrepancy between the actual self and ideal/ought self.
Measurement & activation of regulatory focus:
1. Self-report questionnaires
2. Analysis of the context (e.g: task type)
3. Frame out outcome focus (winning vs not losing something)
4. Reminder of what your ideals are vs what one thinks he/she ought to do
5. Approach vs avoidance movements
Effects of regulatory focus on risk taking:
People with a promotion focus are more inclined to take risks than people with a prevention
focus:
,Note: in 2004 bonds were safer, but less profitable investments than stocks.
Goals:
- Goals → a mental representation of a(n un)desired outcome. ‘I want to
reach/achieve X’
- Achievement goal → the goal has competence as a desired outcome
There are three definitions of competence:
1. Did you meet objective task standards? → absolute competence
2. Did you increase your competence? → intrapersonal competence
3. Did you demonstrate competence? → normative/interpersonal competence
These can be clustered into two types of achievement goals:
1. Mastery → intrapersonal and absolute competence
2. Performance → interpersonal competence
There is a difference between goal and purpose.
The purpose is how you define your competence (e.g: to get admired, to dominate others,
etc.)
There is a 2x2 framework for achievement goals:
- Mastery-approach ‘I want to master a task’, ‘I want to do better than before’
- (Mastery-avoidance ‘I want to avoid doing worse than before’, ‘I want to avoid not
mastering the task’)
- Performance-approach ‘I want to do better than others’
- Performance-avoidance ‘I want to avoid doing worse than others’
Mastery avoidance was additionally not studied. It is however important (e.g: to cope with
the consequences of decline when getting older or injured).
The consequences of achievement goal adoption are:
1. Performance quality → no effects
2. Task enjoyment & intrinsic motivation → low for performance-avoidance
In one study there was no performance standard (the number of Nina’s hidden in the image
was unknown). They had 90s to solve the Nina cartoon puzzle. The instructions trigger a
mastery goal or performance-avoidance of performance-approach goal. The dependent
variable is intrinsic motivation, which was free task engagement.
The performance did not differ across conditions.
, Performance goals are not necessarily bad for free-task engagement Only
performance-avoidance leads to lower task engagement.
Conclusion: competition focused on positive outcomes may not impair intrinsic motivation.
3. Learning from mistakes/disagreement → high for mastery
4. Cooperation with others → high for mastery, but only when competence is low:
Growth mindset:
We have implicit theories of personality (e.g: about intelligence, moral character, etc.).
These implicit (lay) theories are core assumptions about the malleability of personal
qualities.
- Entity theory (fixed mindset) ←→ incremental theory (growth mindset)
This has implications for a broad array of important variables:
- Goals that you adopt
- The importance of effort
- Attribution of adversity
- Reactions to adversity
