Exploring the Over-justification Effect

Exploring the Over-justification Effect Justin Lee PSYC3520 Introduction to Social Psychology u03a1 Theory and Research in Social Psychology Capella University November 2016 Exploring the Over-justification Effect The old adage goes, “If you can find a career doing something you love and get paid for it, you’ve got it made.” On the surface this may sound all good and a sound strategy, but based on research focusing on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, this in not often the case. Intrinsic motivation is the internally rooted positive draw that one feels towards performing an activity, often expressed by the joy of the experience during the activity or the satisfaction that one feels after the activity is completed. In contrast, offering external rewards, often in the form of money, which influences the actor to perform and complete an activity, produces extrinsic motivation. Beyond simple monetary rewards, other forms of external rewards that develop extrinsic motivation may include positive reinforcement and social approval (Deci, 1971). The research shows that if someone is initially intrinsically motivated in the doing or completing of an activity, again meaning they are not rewarded other than the joy of doing the activity in and of itself, and then an external reward is introduced, again often in the form of money, ones intrinsic motivation decreases. Therefore, there seems to be a negative correlation between intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation, whereas, the external rewards undermine the internal rewards, or creates an undermining effect (Deci, 1971). This is officially termed the over-justification effect, as the external rewards are over-justified (Deci, 1971; Li, Sheldon & Liu, 2015). This over-justification of external rewards triggers a cognitive evaluation of motivation for the activity. The initial intrinsic motivational state of the activity-doer was one that was under their locus of control. When external rewards are introduced, the locus of control is perceived to shift from oneself to the source of the external rewards. Again, the reality may be that the activity-doer still maintains personal causation for the activity, yet, from their perspective, they are instead now performing this activity for the external source; this is key. The reason one engages in the activity no longer stems from internal altruistic reasons, but is now seen as being dictated or lured by the external source (Deci, 1971; Li, Sheldon & Liu, 2015). Dialectic Thinking and it’s Effect on Over-justification In their recent study, Le, Sheldon & Liu (2015) set out to explore whether the concept of dialectic thinking had a positive or negative correlation to the severity of the over-justification effect. It can be helpful to describe dialectic thinking in contrast to formal thinking. Formal thinking is what one might call the traditional approach to thinking; where one polarizes the two sides of contradictory information and either fully accepts or fully denies one side of that contradiction. In this way of thinking, one often sees the world in right and wrong, black and white (Li, Sheldon & Liu, 2015). Dialectic thinking then is the ability for one to look at the world in a multidimensional way, accepting that the world is full of contradictions and is ever changing. With this way of thinking, individuals are able to entertain and believe that both sides of the seemingly polarized ideas can exist; they live in a world of greys (Li, Sheldon & Liu, 2015). For dialectic thinkers, this concept of dialecticism is not only held externally, but they accept that they too can hold contradictions internally in their own personality. This enables dialectic thinkers to be more capable in tackling concepts in flux because of their flexibility and comfort with ambiguity (Li, Sheldon & Liu, 2015). Li, Sheldon & Liu (2015) discussed three studies they performed within their paper. The first study consisted of 55 American undergraduate students at the University of Missouri. The students were first measured to determine their level dialectic thinking and then were given a survey where they were asked for a website that they enjoyed browsing. The survey then proposed the participant to imagine that they were participating in market research and that they would be paid to view that site and answer various marketing questions about it. The subsequent two questions related to their self-reporting of the level of extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation. The second study (Li, Sheldon & Liu, 2015) had the 27 America undergraduate students, again from the University of Missouri, individually engaging in an enjoyable activity (a Soma puzzle). Like the previous study, all participants were initially survey to identify their dialectic thinking level. The participants were then told to create 3 shapes, were given 10 minutes per shape to complete, and were offered $1 for each shape that they completed within the allotted 10 minutes. The participants were then debriefed with a survey similar to the first study rating their extrinsic and intrinsic motivation for the task. The third study (Li, Sheldon & Liu, 2015) consisted of 72 Chinese undergraduate students from the Beijing Normal University and 182 American undergraduates from the University of Missouri. Each participant was given a questionnaire containing imaginary scenarios similar to the scenario in the first study. After reading each scenario, the participants answered questions about how much their intrinsic motivation would change after the introduction of the external rewards in comparison to their initial intrinsic motivation level. The results of the studies (Li, Sheldon & Liu, 2015) proved their hypothesis. Those with low levels of dialectic thinking showed a decrease in intrinsic motivation once external rewards were introduced, and this lowered intrinsic motivation continued even after the external rewards were removed. Those with high levels of dialectic thinking were able to maintain their initial intrinsic motivation with the introduction of the external rewards and saw to competition between the intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. And interestingly their hypothesis regarding the expected cultural difference in the moderation of over-justification was validated as the Chinese students recorded higher intrinsic motivation through participation in the reward scenarios than the American students. Moderating the Effects of External Rewards in a Game-based Learning Environment In their recent study, Filsecker & Hickey (2014) explore the use of educational games, specifically the game’s feedback-rich environment, to moderate the over-justification effect in fifth graders. Beyond just motivation, the students’ engagement and learning were being analyzed at varying levels. This study (Filsecker & Hickey, 2014) was performed using 106 fifth graders from a public elementary school in the Midwest of the US. The students engage with the game-based environment named Quest Atlantis where they are introduced to scenarios where decisions need to be made. The game also allows for text-based dialog with other players and dialog with in-game characters. Motivation was measured during the formative assessment portion of the gameplay using a likert scale relating to the following topics: interest, value, perceived competence, and effort. The study (Filsecker & Hickey, 2014) spanned two weeks, where the students would engage in the gameplay on a daily basis for and estimated 70 minutes. One condition for a segment of students was public recognition of their progress through the game as well as associated badges, while the other segment received no public recognition of their progress or badges. The results of the study (Filsecker & Hickey, 2014) revealed that there was little to no impact on intrinsic motivation and interest caused by the external rewards. The study revealed no effect on motivation between those students who received public recognition and those students who did not. The role of the in-game rewards (badges) seems to have produced a self-regulating effect (the rewards integrated informational value and improvement cues), which may have led to the maintenance of the intrinsic motivation of the students. This leads one to believe that the effect of external rewards on intrinsic motivation within learning environments may be negligible or non-existent. Neither the public recognition nor in-game badges undermined the learning and engagement in the study.  References Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 18(1), 105-115. Filsecker, M., & Hickey, D. T. (2014). A multilevel analysis of the effects of external rewards on elementary students' motivation, engagement and learning in an educational game. Computers & Education, 75, 136-148. Li, Y., Sheldon, K. M., & Liu, R. (2015). Dialectical thinking moderates the effect of extrinsic motivation on intrinsic motivation. Learning and Individual Differences, 39, 89-95. Running head: EXPLORING THE OVER-JUSTIFICATION EFFECT 1 EXPLORING THE OVER-JUSTIFICATION EFFECT 8