Progress-focused

This article is about the quality of motivation according to self-determination theory (SDT). I focus on the best quality of motivation: autonomous motivation and explain that it comes in two forms: intrinsic and internalized motivation. Then I explain that there are two wrong ways of thinking about intrinsic motivation. Finally, I come to the conclusion that the balance between intrinsic and internalized motivation can be seen as an important key to success in education and work.

Students' functioning is influenced by their motivation. A new meta-analysis (k = 344, N = 223209) by Howard et al. (2020) maps the relationship between different types of motivation as distinguished within self-determination theory , and different aspects of student functioning. Below I discuss some of the highlights of this research.

A new paper by Di Domenico & Ryan (2017) describes how a neuroscience of intrinsic motivation is emerging. Intrinsic motivation is the total of our spontaneous tendencies to be curious and interested, to seek challenges, and practice to develop our skills and knowledge even in the absence of separate rewards. Research within the framework of self-determination theory has shown that intrinsic motivation is a motivation which is present throughout the life span and which is associated with various positive effects such as learning, performing, creativity, and well-being. But intrinsic motivation is dependent on the perception of one's own competence and autonomy. If these two basic needs are thwarted, we tend to be less intrinsically motivated.

A new study ( Vermote et al., 2020 ) examines how the motivation and mindset of higher education teachers (N = 357) relates to their teaching styles. This research is interesting for the following reasons: It investigates the circumplex model of motivational styles . Aelterman et al. (2019) have previously investigated and confirmed the circular structure in secondary schools. The current study does this in higher education,  It looks at the separate relationship between motivation and mindset on the one hand and teaching styles on the other.  Does teacher motivation predict their teaching style? Does the mindset of teachers predict their teaching style? Read answers to these questions below.

The terms intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are frequently used and are sometimes a source of confusion. Below, I try to share my understanding of these term as they are used in self-determination theory (SDT). First, I'll explain what the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is and  then what the terms intrinsic and extrinsic goals mean.

Two concepts are central to the progress-focused approach : the growth mindset and autonomous motivation. These theories form important pillars of our approach, which is aimed at sustainable effort and meaningful progress. But do growth mindset and autonomous motivation have anything to do with each other? Don't the concepts come from very different research schools? The answer is yes, they are definitely related. In this article, I look at some studies that show there is an interesting interplay between growth mindset and autonomous motivation.

Bieg et al. (2016) did a study to clarify the relation between mastery goals and intrinsic motivation. Let's first look at what these two concepts mean. Meaning and importance of mastery goals and intrinsic motivation Mastery goals are focused on developing competence. This is in contrast with performance goals which are focused on demonstrating one's competence in comparison with others. Why are mastery goals important? Because research has shown that they have many positive effects (in comparison with performance goals), such as choosing challenging goals, persistence, more interest, deeper learning, etc. Intrinsic motivation is the desire to do things which are inherently interesting, fun, exciting or otherwise satisfying. Intrinsic motivation is not only fun. It is also important because it is associated with positive emotions, interest, and deep learning.

Description of a study by Clegg et al. (2022) on the predictors and correlates of autonomous motivation and controlled motivation. In other words: how good motivation is created and what effects it has.

Research guided by self-determination theory has shown that factors like punishment, rewards, threats, coercion, and competition can undermine the quality of motivation of individuals. When those factors are applied the autonomous motivation of individuals, which consists of intrinsic motivation and internalized motivation, can be diminished ( read more about autonomous motivation). In such circumstances a more controlled motivation can emerge which generally comes with anxiety, tension, and worse performance. One factor which also can harm autonomous motivation is grading performance in schools. A new study by Krijgsman et al. (2017) explores the relationship between performance grading and students motivation in physical education (N=409).

Research in self-determination theory has shown that individuals who are autonomously motivated make more progress and feel better. Research has also shown that autonomy support by parents, teachers or supervisors increases the autonomous motivation of children, students and employees respectively. That sounds logical and simple. But there is a little more to the interplay between these variables. New research by Levine et al. (2020) shows that an upward spiral occurs between autonomous motivation and autonomy support.

Self-determination theory (SDT) was developed by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan . They are now among the most-cited psychologists in the world. SDT is the best-researched and most influential motivation theory today. We discuss the value of the SDT for education, showing how important autonomy support and structure are for good motivation.

Various studies have shown that the quality of motivation of students usually decreases during a school year. This declined motivation is accompanied by feeling less well and functioning less well (in terms of behavior and grades). Rinat Cohen et al. (2022) investigated the reasons for this declining motivation. 

If you had to point out one starting point in the development of self-determination theory , it should probably be Edward Deci's classic research into intrinsic motivation. He published that study in 1971, and it was the first major publication in a large series of publications that would follow from Ed Deci and Richard Ryan and an ever-expanding network of researchers . Here you can read a brief description of that study.

One way to describe what the progress-focused approach means is captured in a model which I introduced in my book Kiezen voor progressie . The model (see figure right) describes how both a growth mindset and autonomous motivation contribute to effective effort and how effort in turn creates progress. In this post you read more about this model and it may be used. Looking at this model you might wonder if there should also be an arrow between the growth mindset and autonomous motivation. Do these two influence each other, too? I have thought this before and several people have asked me about it. As far as I know it has been studied only once.

In progress-focused work, motivation plays a central role. One of the most important pillars is supporting autonomous motivation . This means that people engage in activities that they find interesting or important. But not everyone responds the same to autonomy support. Why is that? And what can we do when people respond less positively to it? Here, causality orientation theory (COT) – a relatively “forgotten” mini-theory within self-determination theory (SDT) – offers valuable insights. Read here how you can work with individuals with different causality orientations.

Management practices are based on fundamental assumptions about what motivates people. In a recent article , Marylène Gagné and Rebecca Hewett set out two contrasting views on this: agency theory and self-determination theory. Agency theory assumes that people are primarily motivated by external incentives and control, while self-determination theory states that people are driven by the satisfaction of basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Although self-determination theory is supported by decades of research demonstrating the added value of autonomous motivation, agency theory is still the dominant assumption in management practices.

A recent study ( Boncquet et al., 2023 ) investigated the influence of mindset and motivation on the academic performance of first-year secondary school students (N=3415). This study focused on the quality of motivation according to self-determination theory and the mindset about intelligence following Carol Dweck's framework. The goal was to reveal the impact on learning outcomes such as engagement, learning strategies, and performance.

In this article , I wrote that self-determination theory research shows that when we engage in activities that are in line with our values, we feel and function better. A reader was interested in this and asked me for literature references showing this. You can read my answer here.

The challenges of school closures due to COVID have been significant for many young people. Recent research points to two factors that may support young people to stay motivated with schoolwork during such periods.

By providing autonomy-support to others you can help them a lot. But what do you do when your own motivation isn't so autonomous?  Yesterday, we did a workshop progress-focused management with approximately 25 directors and team leaders of a group of schools. One of the topics we talked about was autonomy support. As a reader of this website, you probably know that self-determination theory distinguishes autonomous motivation from controlled motivation. For new readers, here is a brief summary.