Discussion: View Thread

On Thu, 25 Mar 1999 Larry Pate wrote Re: Motivation
>
[...]>
>I hope these distinctions proves helpful.
>
These distnctions are very helpful, in your usual style. Would you please
go further an comment on what happens to motives when the loop is closed
from rewards?

Jack Ring, 32712 N. 70th St., Snottsdale, AZ 85262-7143
602-488-4615, Cell) 602.369.4615, Fax)602-488-4616
Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt.
Dance like nobody's watching.

Thanks, Jack, for your very kind comments. While I do not purport to be the
final word on any of this, I will comment on "what happens to motives when
the loop is closed from rewards," as you asked. It seems to me that there
are three possibile outcomes: (1) a motive may be strengthened, (2) a
motive may be weakened, and/or (3) a motive may remain unchanged. But there
are so many factors (such as the strength of the motive, the strength of the
reward, individual differences, short-run vs. long-run time factors, etc.)
that it is nearly impossible to say which outcome will result from any
particular reward for a particular individual.

For example, imagine three individuals, each of them moderately hungry, and
we now give them all the same amount of food. One person may experience a
decrease in the desire for food, another may experience an increase in the
desire for food, and the third may experience no measurable change in the
desire for food. We would need to know more about the strength of the
hunger (motive), the extent to which the food (reward) we offer satisfies
that hunger, etc. We could just as well have used the same individual
across three different days and the outcomes would have been the same (for
some individuals).

To further complicate things, motives can be (and often are) in conflict
with one another, such that it is possible for one motive to be strengthened
while another motive is simultaneously weakened. To the extent that our
personalities are determined, in part, by our motives (also by our actions,
perceptions, and memory), there is both a conscious and unconscious quality
to them. That is, we are consciously aware of some of our motives, but
unaware of others. Further, motives are hypothetical constructs that cannot
be seen; they are inferred from observations of behavior. Put all this
together and we begin to see why it can be so very difficult to motivate
someone.

I would welcome others' thoughts on this issue as well.

Best,

Larry


At 12:39 AM 3/27/99 -0700, you wrote:
>On Thu, 25 Mar 1999 Larry Pate wrote Re: Motivation
>>
>[...]>
>>I hope these distinctions prove helpful.
>>
>These distinctions are very helpful, in your usual style. Would you please
>go further and comment on what happens to motives when the loop is closed
>from rewards?
>
>Jack Ring, 32712 N. 70th St., Snottsdale, AZ 85262-7143
>602-488-4615, Cell) 602.369.4615, Fax)602-488-4616
>Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt.
>Dance like nobody's watching.
>

Larry Pate, replying to Jack Ring, writes...

>>It seems to me that there are three possibile outcomes: (1) a motive may
be strengthened, (2) a motive may be weakened, and/or (3) a motive may
remain unchanged. <snip> For example, imagine three individuals, each of
them moderately hungry, and we now give them all the same amount of food.
One person may experience a
decrease in the desire for food, another may experience an increase in the
desire for food, and the third may experience no measurable change in the
desire for food. We would need to know more about the strength of the
hunger (motive), the extent to which the food (reward) we offer satisfies
that hunger, etc. We could just as well have used the same individual
across three different days and the outcomes would have been the same (for
some individuals).

>>To further complicate things, motives can be (and often are) in conflict
with one another, such that it is possible for one motive to be
strengthened while another motive is simultaneously weakened. To the
extent that our personalities are determined, in part, by our motives (also
by our actions, perceptions, and memory), there is both a conscious and
unconscious quality to them. That is, we are consciously aware of some of
our motives, but unaware of others. Further, motives are hypothetical
constructs that cannot
be seen; they are inferred from observations of behavior. Put all this
together and we begin to see why it can be so very difficult to motivate
someone.

>>I would welcome others' thoughts on this issue as well."

An alternative explanation would assert that the individuals in question
are controlling for hunger level (i.e., for a state of not being hungry)
and that their reference conditions for a state of not being hungry are
different (which we might attribute to different appetites, etc.). An
"error signal" would be generated as a result of each individual comparing
his or her reference condition for not being hungry with his or her
currently perceived level of hunger. The individuals in question might
also be experiencing differently perceived degrees of error signal. The
different responses would then be accounted for by the differences in
reference conditions, perceived conditions, error signals, and the
perceived effects of ingesting food on the perceived degree of hunger. No
motive involved at all, simply a living control system in action.

Fred Nickols, Executive Director
Strategic Planning & Management Services
Educational Testing Service [01-D]
Princeton, NJ 08541
Tel = 609.734.5077 Fax = 609.734.5590
e-mail = fnickols@ets.org

Views expressed are the author's, not ETS's.