Need for Achievement Theory.
Originally proposed by McClelland (McClelland, Atkinson, Clark,
& Lowell, 1953), this theory hypothesizes that all humans have
a distinct internal motive to seek achievement, attainment of
realistic (but challenging) goals, and advancement. Individuals are
believed to posses a strong need for feedback regarding their
achievement and progress, and a need for a sense of
accomplishment.
Intrinsic Motivation Theory.
Intrinsic motivation theory postulates that “when individuals
are intrinsically motivated, they engage in an activity because
they are interested in and enjoy the activity. When
extrinsically motivated, individuals engage in activities for
instrumental or other reasons, such as receiving a
reward”(Eccles & Wigfield, 2002, p.
112).
Self-determination Theory. According
to Deci and Ryan (1985), self-determination theory explains 2 main
components of human motivation—“(a) humans are
motivated to maintain an optimal level of stimulation (Hebb, 1955),
and (b) humans have basic needs for competence (White, 1959) and
personal causation or self-determination (deCharms,
1968)”(Eccles and Wigfield, 2002, p. 112). Deci and
Ryan argue that self-determination plays a role in both intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation. The basic premise of the theory, is
that a person will feel a sense of self-determination when they are
able to determine the activities they will engage in and feel
competent with during task performance.
Goal Theory. Researchers have
proposed a number of models to describe how individuals develop and
display goal-directed behavior. Bandura (1997) and
Shunk’s (1990) research suggests that “specific,
proximal, and somewhat challenging goals promote both self-efficacy
and improved performance” (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002, p.
115). Cognitive goal theory is based on the hypothesis
that “all actions are given meaning, direction, and purpose
by the goals that individuals seek out, and that the quality and
intensity of behavior will change as these goals
change”(Covington, 2000, p. 174). Goal theory focuses on the
role that “purpose” plays in motivation attitudes and
behavior (Anderman & Maehr, 1994; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002;
Maehr, 1999; Snow et al., 1996; Urdan & Maehr, 1995). In
an academic context, a person’s achievement goal orientation
deals with a student’s reason for taking a course, wanting a
desired grade, etc. (Anderman et al., 2002). Although the
specific terminology may differ across researchers, goal theory
typically proposes 2 general goal orientations (Covington, 2000;
Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002a). The underlying
commonality among the different models is a distinction between a
goal orientation driven by a concern for personal ability and
normative social comparison (performance goal orientation) versus
an orientation with a focus on task completion, understanding,
developing and learning new skills, and mastery (learning goal
orientation).
Goal Setting Theory. According to
Locke and Latham (2002), goal-setting theory, which is largely an
inductively derived theory (emerged from empirical research), is
based on the premise that conscious goals affect action. Goal
setting theory focuses on understanding the relationship between
conscious performance goals and subsequent levels of task
performance.
Interest Theory. Contemporary interest
theory makes a distinction between individual and situational
interest. “Individual interest is a relatively stable
evaluative orientation towards certain domains; situational
interest is an emotional state aroused by specific features of an
activity or a task” (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002, p.
114). The domain of individual interest is often
differentiated further into the categories of feeling-related
(based more on feelings) and value- related (based more on personal
significance of a situation) interests (Eccles & Wigfield,
2002). For the most part, research on situational interest
has focused on “characteristics of academic tasks that create
interest (e.g., Hidi & Baird, 1986)” (Eccles
&Wigfield, 2002, p. 115). Research on individual
interest, on the other hand, has focused more on the quality of
learning and how it is related to interest.
Expectancy and Value
Theory. Contemporary expectancy-value theories of
motivation are based in Atkinson’s (1964) expectancy- value
model, in that they link achievement performance, persistence, and
choice most directly to an individual’s expectancy-related
and task-value beliefs. The expectancy component of the
theory focuses on an individual’s beliefs about their
competence, efficacy, expectations for success and failure, and
feelings of control over the outcomes of situations. The
value component focuses on an individual’s incentives,
motivations, and reasons for engaging in activities. Most
contemporary expectancy-value theories believe that expectancies
and values are positively related.
Self-efficacy Theory. Self-efficacy
theory can be traced to Bandura’s social cognitive model of
motivation. “Bandura defined self- efficacy as
individuals’ confidence in their ability to organize and
execute a given course of action to solve a problem or accomplish a
task; he characterized it as a multidimensional construct that
varies in strength, generality, and level (or
difficulty)”(Eccles & Wigfield, 2002, p. 110). The
focus of self-efficacy theory is on expectations for success
(outcome expectations—a belief that certain behaviors will
result in certain outcomes) and efficacy expectations (beliefs of
whether one can perform the behaviors necessary to attain a certain
outcome).
Attribution Theory. Attribution
theory deals primarily with an individual’s interpretation of
their achieved outcomes, rather than how specific motivational
dispositions or realized outcomes affect subsequent achievement
strivings (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). “Attribution models
include beliefs about ability and expectancies for success, along
with incentives for engaging in different activities, including
valuing of achievement (see Graham & Taylor,
2001)”(Eccles & Wigfield, 2002, p. 117). The key
achievement attributes, as identified by Weiner and associates, are
ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck (Eccles & Wigfield,
2002). These attributes are further described along the
dimensions of locus of control, stability, and
controllability.
Control Theory. Control theory
is another type of expectancy-value theory and focuses on the
hypothesis that an individual can only be successful to the extent
they feel they have control over a situation (Eccles &Wigfield,
2002). Connell & Wellborn (1991); have also integrated
control beliefs into a broader framework that includes 3 basic
psychological needs: competence, autonomy, and relatedness. This
theory posits a link between control beliefs and competence
needs—individuals who believe they are in control of their
achievement outcomes will feel more competent.
Self-worth Theory. Self-worth theory
seeks to link motivational behavior to ability-related and
valued-related constructs, as well as focusing on mental health
“as a key determinant of the relation of expectancies and
values to achievement behaviors” (Eccles & Wigfield,
2002, p. 122). Covington (1992, 1998) hypothesized that
establishing and maintaining a positive self- image (i.e., a
positive view of self-worth) is a primary human
motive.
Social Awareness Theory. According to
Greenspan (1981a), “the term social awareness may be defined
as the individual’s ability to understand people, social
events, and the processes involved in regulating social
events. The emphasis on interpersonal understanding as the
core operation in social awareness indicates that this construct is
a cognitive component of human competence” (p.
18). Social awareness is a multidimensional
hierarchical construct that includes: social sensitivity (which
subsumes the subdomains of role-taking and social inference);
social insight (subdomains of social comprehension, psychological
insight, and moral judgment); and social communication (subdomains
of referential communication and social problem- solving).
Social awareness is one component of a larger all-encompassing
model of personal competence that also includes emotional
competence, physical competence, conceptual intelligence, and
practical intelligence.
Social Cognitive Theories of Self-Regulation,
Volition, & Motivation. In general terms, social
cognitive theories of self-regulation focus on “how
motivation gets translated into regulated behavior, and how
motivation and cognition are linked” (Eccles & Wigfield,
2002, p. 124). A self-regulated student would be described as
an individual who is “metacognitively, motivationally, and
behaviorally active in their own learning processes and in
achieving their own goals” (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002, p.
124). Multiple determinants of self-regulation have been
suggested and include environmental, personal, and behavioral
components, as well as context. The primary processes
hypothesized to occur during self-regulation include self-
observation, self-judgment, and self-reactions (Eccles
&Wigfield, 2002).
