Showing papers on "Overjustification effect published in 2005"

Incentives and Prosocial Behavior

Abstract: We build a theory of prosocial behavior that combines heterogeneity in individual altruism and greed with concerns for social reputation or self-respect. The presence of rewards or punishments creates doubt as to the true motive for which good deeds are performed, and this "overjustification effect" can result in a net crowding out of prosocial behavior by extrinsic incentives. The model also allows us to identify settings that are conducive to multiple social norms of behavior, and those where disclosing one's generosity may backfire. Finally, we analyze the equilibrium contracts offered by sponsors, including the level and confidentiality or publicity of incentives. Sponsor competition may cause rewards to bid down rather than up, and can even reduce social welfare by requiring agents to engage in inefficient sacrifices.

Achievement-Based Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation: A Test of Cognitive Mediators

Abstract: This study assessed how rewards impacted intrinsic motivation when students were rewarded for achievement while learning an activity, for performing at a specific level on a test, or for both. Undergraduate university students engaged in a problem-solving activity. The design was a 2 2 factorial with 2 levels of reward in a learning phase (reward for achievement, no reward) and 2 levels of reward in a test phase (reward for achievement, no reward). Intrinsic motivation was measured as time spent on the experimental task and ratings of task interest during a free-choice period. A major finding was that achievement-based rewards during learning or testing increased participants’ intrinsic motivation. A path analysis indicated that 2 processes (perceived competence and interest–internal attribution) mediated the positive effects of achievement-based rewards in learning and testing on intrinsic motivation. Findings are discussed in terms of the cognitive evaluation, attribution, and social–cognitive theories.

Motivation Crowding and the Federal Civil Servant: Evidence from the U.S. Internal Revenue Service

Abstract: Pay-for-performance reforms create high-powered incentives for civil servants to meet or exceed specified performance objectives as measured by such things as customer satisfaction. Economists and social psychologists have advanced the claim that high-powered incentives for performance may empirically lessen the effect of civil servants' intrinsic motivation toward achieving agency goals (motivation can be crowded-out). Nonetheless, well-designed pay-for-performance incentives may crowd-in intrinsic motivation. A number of federal agencies and subagencies have undergone personnel management reforms that raise the specter of this pattern of motivation crowding. Does it happen? Is intrinsic motivation crowded-in or crowded-out? This paper employs item response theory to create measurement models for the estimation a latent trait of intrinsic motivation for employees of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) using data from the 2002 Federal Human Capital Survey. The IRS implemented a paybanding system that imposed high-powered performance incentives on supervisors, but not on non-supervisory personnel. Results suggest that the IRS reward structure crowded-in intrinsic motivation at the lowest levels intrinsic motivation, but that at the highest levels of motivation intrinsic motivation is crowded-out.

Interactive Impact of Intrinsic Motivators and Extrinsic Rewards on Behavior and Motivation Outcomes

Abstract: In this study we examined the interrelationship among extrinsic rewards and achievement goals (including a work-avoidance goal), competence beliefs, and task values associated with health-enhancing running tasks over a school year. A group of elementary school students ( n = 119) from a program that promoted running for running’s sake and another ( n = 88) from a program that promoted running through games provided pre- and post-year data on students’achievement goals, competence beliefs, task values, achievement in running tests, and future intention to continue running as a health-enhancing activity. Results showed that students in the running-for-games program demonstrated significant growth in task-involved achievement goals. The regression analyses showed that extrinsic reward and selected intrinsic motivation constructs played a small role in predicting running-test scores. Interest, however, emerged as the most important intrinsic motivation construct for predicting future motivation for running. Interest seemed to override the effects not only of extrinsic reward but also of other intrinsic motivation sources. This finding suggests that interest-based motivation sources might have a strong and prolonged effect on learner motivation.

Power of Incentives in Public Organizations When Employees Are Intrinsically Motivated

Abstract: This paper studies the power of incentives in public organizations when some employees are intrinsically motivated to deliver the socially desirable outcome, while others are only driven by extrinsic incentives. To alleviate agency problems, the standard moral-hazard model suggests the use of instruments such as performance pay. This intervention might interact with intrinsic motivation. I introduce intrinsic motivation into the standard multiple-task moral-hazard model, and identify conditions under which extrinsic incentives lead to crowding in or crowding out of intrinsic motivation. The optimal reward structure shifts away from the use of monetary incentives when more employees are intrinsically motivated.

The classroom as a social psychology laboratory

Abstract: The typical classroom illustrates many common social psychology concepts and phenomena, although often with less–than–desirable results. I give examples of self–handicapping, self–serving bias, belief perseverance, the fundamental attribution error, social categorization, and the overjustification effect as they occur in the classroom. It is possible that alerting instructors and students to these principles may lessen their occurrence.

Exploring the reward preferences for middle level managers

Abstract: Managerial motivation depends, in part, on the perceived value or attractiveness of the rewards offered to the manager. This perception‐based study provides empirical evidence of the associations between motivation and performance, and valued rewards. Generally, for this sample of 225 middle‐level managers, intrinsic rewards are more highly valued than extrinsic but higher motivation and performance is positively associated with a preference for a combination of rewards. Preference patterns by stage of career, position in the hierarchy or functional area are not detected. Whilst valued rewards appear to have an influence on motivation and performance, particularly when applied in combination, the determinants of preferences appear to be diverse.

Student Motivation: The Bottom Line

Abstract: When reviewing the basic principles of teaching and learning (Newcomb, McCracken, Warmbrod & Whittington, 2004) and then overlaying those principles with the research that has been done in this arena, it is our view that we are inevitably drawn to the basic idea that the bottom line related to student achievement is the motivation of the students themselves (see motivation principles 3-6 from Newcomb et al.). Of course the other principles are important, but without student motivation little learning takes place. Motivated students can work through and overcome instructional shortcomings in other areas, but if their motivation is lacking, then even exceptional work of teachers with the other principles rarely compensates for that shortfall. The purpose of this article is to call attention to the impact that reward and reinforcement have on the motivation of students (see reward and reinforcement principles 7-9 from Newcomb et al.). Theoretically and pragmatically speaking, the power of ideas like appropriate praise and positive reinforcement has been well established in the social science literature base. Duncan and Biddle (1974) found that praise in traditional teaching was in short supply and that appropriate praise was associated with more positive student self-concepts and higher student achievement. Criticism, on the other hand, was associated with lower student achievement (Rosenshine & Furst, 1971). Further, it was found that criticism has a negative correlation to student achievement. That is, generally the more the criticism the less well students perform. More recent research has reaffirmed those findings (Hancock, 2000, Hancock, et al. 2002). This does not mean that teachers should avoid giving academic directions. What it does say is that students generally perform better in situations where the climate is more positive in nature. Motivating students to achieve academically raises the specter of intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation. Teachers want to know how to influence student motivation given that students often arrive at school with a predetermined attitude about their ability to succeed or fail. The fundamental competitive view of our economic system often dictates the ways in which many reward systems are organized to motivate students. Rather than finding ways to recognize each student as an individual as suggested by many school experts, teachers often set out to develop systems that will manage both behavior and academics by rewarding those who comply and punishing those who do not (Kohn, 1986; 1993; 1996). The Skinnerian model of changing behavior by immediate feedback, such as praise or negative response, remains in classrooms even though the theory itself has been found ineffective for changing behaviors long term (Brophy, 1998; Carter, 1996; Jensen, 1998, Johnson, 1999; Kohn, 1993). Therefore, based on current research, it seems inappropriate to use behaviorist models to motivate students to achieve academically. External rewards, while still popular, generally have only a short-term positive effect and possible long-term negative effects on learning. When students have a sense of control and choice, on the other hand, and are challenged just above their level of competence, they have increased intrinsic motivation, persistence, and belief that they can be successful. Brophy (1998) helps teachers make a distinction between positive recognition and providing rewards. He notes that intrinsic motivation is not undermined by the use of rewards as such, but offering rewards in advance of action as incentives leads students to believe that they engaged in the rewarded behaviors only to earn the rewards. The students' focus is on the reward, not on the learning that has value in its own right. It is no surprise that to improve students' academic achievement, successful programs incorporate the social contexts for both intrinsic motivation and internalized extrinsic motivation. …

Rewards and motivation in the classroom

Abstract: Findings from meta-analyses on the effects of rewards on students' performance and motivation as well as a consideration of social cognitive theory suggest a set of strategies for using rewards in educational settings. In this article, we briefly describe the research literature on rewards, performance and motivation, and we discuss the importance of tying rewards to achievable challenging standards of performance. In addition, we provide guidelines for setting up effective incentive programs in classroom settings. Introduction The use of rewards in educational settings is an issue that has generated controversy. On one side of the debate are researchers and writers from the humanist tradition who argue that rewards are detrimental. (e.g., Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999; Kohn, 1993). From the humanist perspective, structured environments, interventions by teachers, and reward systems are seen as forms of external control that limit individual expression and freedom. Specifically, the concern is that rewards may entice students to perform an activity but, once the rewards are no longer available, students' intrinsic motivation to engage in activities is undermined. Researchers on the other side of the debate argue that negative effects of reward are limited and that the appropriate use of rewards can boost performance and lead to a personal sense of intrinsic motivation (e.g., Cameron, Banko & Pierce, 2001; Eisenberger & Cameron, 1996; Dickinson, 1989; Flora & Flora, 1999). Over the past few years, the debate has moved beyond the question of whether rewards are inherently harmful or beneficial. Instead, researchers recognize that the effects of incentives and reward programs depend on the types of rewards used, how rewards are allocated, and the context in which rewards are administered. The purpose of this article is to describe research on the topic of rewards, performance, and motivation; to summarize the research findings; and to discuss the implications of the findings for educational settings. Research On Rewards, Performance And Motivation Much of our understanding of the reward process comes from experimental research on the topic. Since the 1970's, numerous experiments, using a common set of procedures, have been conducted to investigate how rewards affect people's performance and motivation. The original experiments conducted by Deci (1971) and Lepper, Greene, & Nisbett (1973) established the typical protocol for investigating rewards and motivation. In a typical experiment, participants (children or college students) are presented with an interesting task (puzzle solving, drawing, word games, etc.). An experimental group is offered a reward (praise, money, gold stars, access to other activities, etc.) for doing the task; participants in a control condition engage in the activity without receiving a reward. Rewarded and non-rewarded participants are then observed during a free-choice period without reward in which they are free to continue performing the experimental task or to engage in an alternate activity (e.g., read magazines). The time participants spend on the target activity during the free-choice period, their performance on the task during the free-choice period, and ratings of task interest are used as measures of intrinsic motivation. If rewarded participants spend less free time on the activity, perform at a lower level, and express less task interest than non-rewarded participants, reward is said to undermine intrinsic motivation. An increase in intrinsic motivation is indicated when rewarded participants report greater task interest, spend more time on the task, or perform at a higher level than non rewarded participants. Over the past ten years there have been a number of reviews and meta-analyses of the experimental studies. In the most recent meta-analysis of the literature, Cameron et al. (2001) reviewed 145 studies and identified several conditions under which rewards were found to decrease or increase people's performance and motivation. …