Motivation: 3 Elements

[Mr Epee]

I was listening to Science Friday this afternoon and the guest was discussing persuasive technology and the guest gave a very simple, but useful, description of the basic elements of motivation. Certainly, there may be some alt thoughts on the subject, but it seemed fairly complete.

Since the subject has come up here recently in a few other threads, I thought I would share.

1. expectation of short-term reward/punishment

2. hope / fear

3. social acceptance / social rejection

Keeping these various categories clear in your head may lead to a better understanding of the root of a pupils involvement in fencing.

The more you know (cue shooting star and theme)

[Goldgar]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

1. expectation of short-term reward/punishment

2. hope / fear

3. social acceptance / social rejection

Does category 2, "hope/fear", map to expectation of *long-term* reward/punishment?

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by Goldgar

Does category 2, "hope/fear", map to expectation of *long-term* reward/punishment?

I assumed so... but I'm not sure that calling them reward/punishment is maybe the best term for longer term effects of an action or path. Maybe it's better to think of long term positive and negative outcomes. That's a little different from reward/punishment.

I don't think he explicitly said so, but that's how I understood it.

[keith]

Originally Posted by Goldgar

Does category 2, "hope/fear", map to expectation of *long-term* reward/punishment?

No.

One could be be motivated by hope/fear without any expectation of long term tangible reward/punishment.

However, in most cases you are looking at varying degrees of the three - all are probably applying to some degree.

[Mr Epee]

thank you, keith... that's what I was stumbling towards.

I can hope to earn a rating and work towards that goal with no guarantee of success and yet it still motivates my behavior in the training room.

And I agree that these things rarely work independently as sole motivators, but I thought it was a nice simple way to look at a variety of situations and identify the driving factors.

For example: I've known several female fencers who were highly motivated to meet the expectations of their coaches. Was it their only motivation? No. Had their motivation changed over the course of their fencing careers? Absolutely.

Just interesting to consider, and nice to have a basic frame.

[Hauptman]

It seems like there is quite a bit of overlap in those 3 categories. Social acceptance/rejection can certainly be seen as reward/punishment, and hope or fear would seem to connect hope of reward, and fear of punishment.

Now I'm going to have to find the PodCast of that show to get more details!!

[jBirch]

This seems to map tightly to the standard Pavlovian Operant conditioning models of behaviour.

Social Acceptance/Rejection are just other forms of reward/punishment while Hope/Fear is the anticipation of the reward/punishment.

I'm not sure I buy this as a useful framework.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

For example: I've known several female fencers who were highly motivated to meet the expectations of their coaches. Was it their only motivation? No. Had their motivation changed over the course of their fencing careers? Absolutely.

One of the semi-ethical thoughts on this I've heard, is that creating a dependency between the coach and student is important to increasing coachability. It is far easier to create a female/male dependency then it is to create a female/female dependency or a male/male dependency.

Driving it back to rewards/punishments, the classic abusive dependent relationship is to create an "addiction to hope", where the subjugated party is berated and controlled mercilessly and then very infrequently praised lavishly. In this case, this is the style of coaching where the coach is extraordinarily abusive and denigrating until the student wins a competition at which point in time, they lavish the student with gifts and affection, only to return to abuse in the lesson.

Bringing Freud into the mix, students that are particularly susceptable to this motivational style happen to be those with significant "daddy" issues (I'm assuming male coach, female student here) and so coaches may tend to gravitate to students that express those specific characteristics.

This might explain the "young female motivation to meet the expectations of the older male coach".

While it does allow the coach to more precisely control "motivation", I would definitely say that it is semi-ethical at best.

James.

[keith]

'tis useful to be reminded of this stuff.

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

Was it their only motivation? No. Had their motivation changed over the course of their fencing careers? Absolutely.

From a coaching point of view the important aspect may be recognizing the change in principal motivation. I wonder if attrition rates might not be affected about how a coach goes about meeting the motivational requirements of students - providing a range of motivational responses?

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by jBirch

While it does allow the coach to more precisely control "motivation", I would definitely say that it is semi-ethical at best.

James.

Semi-ethical is certainly a kind way to put it...

And ultimately there is a question of whose goals are being pursued.

The coach's goals, or the student's goals?

Tricky ground underfoot.

[chefencer]

Originally Posted by Hauptman

Now I'm going to have to find the PodCast of that show to get more details!!

http://www.sciencefriday.com/program/archives/200803075

[Rick Thompson]

Regarding the short-term goals/expectations:

Long-term g/e are not addressed in this, though that's a major motivation for some athletes (e.g. earning a 'B' or competing in the Olympics....)

OTOH, some fencers (especially beginning/intermediate) are motivated strictly by how they how they hope to do at the next tournament. This is short-term with blinders on.

I view the coach's role as working with the fencer to create a long-term goal, and then provide the means for the fencer to meet short-term goals while working towards the larger target. Managing the Macro & the Micro.

One problem is that many of the "goals" in this sport are competition based, which is not necessarily a true measure of an athlete's progress. Therefore, a coach needs to provide additional objective measurements by which the athlete can judge their progress.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by Rick Thompson

Regarding the short-term goals/expectations:

Long-term g/e are not addressed in this, though that's a major motivation for some athletes (e.g. earning a 'B' or competing in the Olympics....)

OTOH, some fencers (especially beginning/intermediate) are motivated strictly by how they how they hope to do at the next tournament. This is short-term with blinders on.

I view the coach's role as working with the fencer to create a long-term goal, and then provide the means for the fencer to meet short-term goals while working towards the larger target. Managing the Macro & the Micro.

One problem is that many of the "goals" in this sport are competition based, which is not necessarily a true measure of an athlete's progress. Therefore, a coach needs to provide additional objective measurements by which the athlete can judge their progress.

This assumes that students are motivated by goal achievement. Not all are.

James.

[chefencer]

I think there is an important element missing from this paradigm (which doesn't really fit under social acceptance) that is one of the most effective motivating tools in any teacher/student interaction: personal connection. Students who value their relationship with their teacher push themselves and don't mind doing the boring stuff. Mentoring is a very powerful force.