Motivation and performance: Two consequences of winning and losing in competition

The present study examined the effects of competitive outcome—either a win or a loss—on intrinsic motivation. Winning was hypothesized to facilitate both performance and intrinsic motivation. Fifty-four participants, 29 females and 25 males, competed against a same-gender confederate in a puzzle-solving contest. Following the competition, participants' intrinsic motivation was surreptitiously measured by the amount of time spent playing with the puzzle while alone. Results showed that winning facilitated both actual competitive performance and intrinsic motivation relative to losing. The importance of considering the outcome when predicting intrinsic motivation after competition is discussed.     

The Zeigarnik effect and intrinsic motivation: Are they the same?

The present study focused on delineating the parameters under which intrinsic motivation leads an individual to reengage an activity from those that result in the Zeigarnik effect. In a posttask free-choice period, participants not completing the experimental task displayed more reengagement behavior than participants completing the task (the Zeigarnik effect). When participants were also provided self-efficacious performance feedback via a prearranged competitive outcome manipulation, there was no evidence of the Zeigarnik effect, while there was support for intrinsic motivation from competent self-efficacious performance feedback. Results were discussed in terms of distinguishing between intrinsic motivation and the Zeigarnik effect as sources of reengagement motivation. It was concluded that, in the presence of self-efficacious performance feedback, the competent-incompetent impression was more salient than task-completion feedback.Preparation of this article was supported by Texas Christian University grant TCU/RF 5-23757.     

The beliefs that underlie autonomy-supportive and controlling teaching: A multinational investigation

We investigated the role of three beliefs in predicting teachers’ motivating style toward students—namely, how effective, how normative, and how easy-to-implement autonomy-supportive and controlling teaching were each believed to be. We further examined national collectivism–individualism as a predictor of individual teachers’ motivating style and beliefs about motivating style, as we expected that a collectivistic perspective would tend teachers toward the controlling style and toward positive beliefs about that style. Participants were 815 full-time PreK-12 public school teachers from eight different nations that varied in collectivism–individualism. All three teacher beliefs explained independent and substantial variance in teachers’ self-described motivating styles. Believed effectiveness was a particularly strong predictor of self-described motivating style. Collectivism–individualism predicted which teachers were most likely to self-describe a controlling motivating style, and a mediation analysis showed that teachers in collectivistic nations self-described a controlling style because they believed it to be culturally normative classroom practice. These findings enhance the literature on the antecedents of teachers’ motivating styles by showing that teacher beliefs strongly predict motivating style, and that culture informs one of these beliefs—namely, normalcy.     

Expressing Intrinsic Motivation Through Acts of Exploration and Facial Displays of Interest

Intrinsically-motivated behavior has been defined through participants' task persistence, during a free-choice interval. While fruitful, this operational definition assesses only the person's postperformance reaction to an activity. Presumably, people experience and express intrinsic motivation during task engagement as well. The need therefore exists for a supplemental in-performance behavioral measure of intrinsic motivation. To test the viability of constructing such a measure, we recorded the extent to which five acts of exploration and four facial displays of interest corresponded to self-reports of interest, self-determination, and competence for 60 undergraduates as they solved SOMA puzzles. Correlational and LISREL analyses confirmed the validity of three acts of exploration and two facial displays of interest We concluded that just as task persistence is a valid postperformance indicator of intrinsic motivation, acts of exploration and facial displays of interest are valid in-performance indicators.     

Cortisol reactivity to a teacher’s motivating style: the biology of being controlled versus supporting autonomy

We hypothesized that participants engaged in a learning activity would show a biological stress response when exposed to a controlling teacher but biological calm when exposed to an autonomy-supportive teacher. Seventy-eight undergraduates (53 females, 25 males) engaged in a 20-minute puzzle-solving activity while exposed to a teacher who enacted either a controlling, neutral, or autonomy-supportive motivating style. Salivary cortisol was assessed before, during, and after the learning activity, and a post-experimental questionnaire assessed participants’ perceptions of the teacher’s motivating style and indices of positive functioning. Manipulated motivating style affected participants’ cortisol, as exposure to a controlling style increased cortisol while exposure to an autonomy-supportive style decreased it, relative to exposure to a neutral style. Correlational analyses with the self-report measures showed that cortisol reactivity occurred in response to interpersonal events rather than to psychological appraisals. We conclude that cortisol reactivity is sensitive to a teacher’s motivating style and that elevated cortisol signals interpersonal obtrusion and pressure while dampened cortisol signals perspective-taking and support.