Social Psychology and Motivation in Sport Hagger & Chatzisarantis Chapter 5

u “She’s a highly motivated person” u “She didn’t have enough encouragement to motivate her” u “What was their motivation?” u “He wasn’t very motivated to get out of bed today” What is Motivation?

“The direction and intensity of one’s effort” Sage (1977) u Contrast: u Trait-like perspective u State-like or situational perspective u Interactional approach What is Motivation?

“Why people initiate, choose, or persist in specific actions in specific circumstances” Mook (1987) “Motivation has to do with why any behaviour gets started, is energized, is sustained, is directed, is stopped and what kind of subjective reaction is present in the organism when all this is going on” Jones (1955) “Motivation is what gets you started, habit is what keeps you going” Jim Ryun What is Motivation?

Attributions –inferences about causes Achievement behavior depends on how previous successes and failures are interpreted People make causal attributions for their achievement outcomes Attributions affect thoughts, feelings, and behavior Weiner’s (1972) Attribution theory

 People tend to attribute successes or failures to any of four ‘typical’ causes:  Ability  Effort  Difficulty  Luck Weiner’s (1972) Attribution theory

Weiner’s (1972) Attribution Dimensions Locus of causalityLocus of controlStability Basic Attribution Categories

Locus of causalityLocus of controlStability Basic Attribution Categories Weiner’s (1972) Attribution Dimensions

Attribution Dimensions Attributions can be classified along three dimensions: 1) Locus of Causality -Is the cause internal or external?

Locus of causalityLocus of controlStability Basic Attribution Categories Weiner’s (1972) Attribution Dimensions

Attribution Dimensions Attributions can be classified along three dimensions: 1) Locus of Causality -Is the cause internal or external? 2) Stability -Is the cause stable or unstable?

Stability Locus of Causality Stable External Stable Internal Unstable Internal Unstable External AbilityTask difficulty Luck Effort Weiner’s (1972) 2 x 2 Taxonomy of Attributions

Locus of causalityLocus of controlStability Basic Attribution Categories Weiner’s (1972) Attributional Dimensions

Weiner’s (1972) Attribution Dimensions Attribution Dimensions Attributions can be classified along three dimensions: 1) Locus of Causality -Is the cause internal or external? 2) Stability -Is the cause stable or unstable? 3) Locus of control -Does the person have control over the outcome?

Stable Internal Controllable Stable External Controllable Unstable Internal Controllable Unstable External Controllable Stability Locus of Causality Controllability Stable External Uncontrollable Unstable External Uncontrollable Stable Internal Uncontrollable Unstable Internal Uncontrollable Stable External Controllable Stable Internal Controllable Unstable Internal Controllable Unstable External Controllable Weiner’s (1972) Attribution Dimensions

Attributed causes according to Internal-External (Locus of Causality), Stability and Controllability continuums  Ability  Internal, stable, uncontrollable  Effort  Internal, unstable, controllable  Difficulty  External, stable, uncontrollable  Luck  External, unstable, uncontrollable Weiner’s (1972) Attribution Dimensions

Adaptive Causal Attributions u Effort attributions for success (internal, unstable, controllable) u Cognitive: “I did well because I studied hard” u Affective: “I feel good because I worked hard and it paid off” u Behavioural: “I will try hard again next time and expect to do well”

Adaptive Causal Attributions u Effort attributions for failure (internal, unstable, controllable) u Cognitive: “I did poorly because I didn’t study hard enough” u Affective: “I feel optimistic that next time I will do better” u Behavioural: “I will try harder next time and expect to do well”

Problematic and Maladaptive Causal Attributions  Ability  What does this mean for future successes and failures if ability is fixed?  Luck  Successes and failures are at the whims of fate

Importance of Attributions and Limitations u Affect our future expectations of success and failure and related to positive emotional profiles (Biddle et al., 2001) u Determines future cognitions, attitudes and behavior (e.g., self-confidence, self-efficacy) Thus attributions affect the ANTECEDENTS (expectations) of future behaviour Biddle et al. (2001) suggests that attribution theory gives only a partial explanation and focuses on too narrow a set of constructs

Bandura’s (1977, 1997) Social Cognitive Theory u Examines the effect of vicarious experience (watching others) and confidence influence motivation and behaviour u Beliefs about skills and abilities central to the theory u Key construct is self-efficacy u Self-efficacy: Situation specific self-confidence to achieve outcomes e.g., a hockey players’ goal of completing a 90% pass rate in a match u Self-efficacy arises from several ‘sources of information’ about an athlete’s ability to produce outcomes u Two broad categories of information: previous experience and current influences u There are two sets of outcomes: behavioural and psychological

Bandura’s (1977, 1997) Social Cognitive Theory SourcesOutcomesSelf-efficacy Performance accomplishment Vicarious experience Experience Verbal persuasion Psychological states Current influences Goal pursuit Affective outcomes Attributions Psychological outcomes Choice Effort Persistence Behavioural outcomes Situation-specific Beliefs in ability to produce outcomes Beliefs about outcomes Features of self-efficacy

Self-Efficacy in Sport u Meta-analyses show a moderate effect between self- efficacy and performance such as in the workplace (Stjkovic & Luthans, 1998) u Narrative reviews acknowledge the effect of self- efficacy beliefs on sport performance (Feltz & Chase, 1998; McAuley & Blissmer, 2002) u Self-efficacy is therefore an important motivational construct in sport u Experimental evidence using ‘bogus feedback’ supports self-efficacy on motor task u Bogus feedback shows the performer does ‘better’ or ‘worse’ than they actually did – they then self-report their self-efficacy u E.g. Weinberg et al. (1980) demonstrated that high- self-efficacy performers did better on subsequent tasks

Outcome Expectancies in Sport u Outcome expectancies reflect beliefs that the behaviour will result in desired outcomes rather than beliefs about ability (Bandura, 1977, 1997) u Personal evaluations of outcome shown to affect performance better than objective evaluations in gymnasts (Halliburton & Weiss, 2002) u Outcome self-efficacy was more important than performance self-efficacy on performance on a motor-tasks (Martin & Gill, 1991) u Outcome expectancies found to moderate the influence of self-efficacy on behaviour and outcome (Williams & Bond, 2002)

Where Does Self-Efficacy Come From? Antecedents of self-efficacy: u Previous experience indicates ‘performance accomplishment in the past (Feltz & Chase, 1998) u Vicarious experience: Studies using ‘models’ indicate that these improve self-efficacy e.g. verbal and visual cues in weight training (Carnahan et al., 1990) u Physiological states: Cognitive and somatic anxiety levels predict self-efficacy (Martin & Gill, 1991) u Multiple sources of information: Gould and Weiss (1981) studied impact of model (similar vs. dissimilar) and verbal persuasion (self-efficacy talk vs. no talk) and Wise and Trunnell (2001) found 3 types of information positively affected performance in weight training

Enhancing Self-Efficacy To enhance self-efficacy the following techniques have been used: u Goal setting: Basketballers who received training to set appropriate goals had a stronger relationship between self-efficacy and free-throw performance (Miller & McAuley, 1997) u Imagery: Imagery may provide a ‘self-model’ to enhance self-efficacy given the influence of modeling on self-efficacy. Research using imagery has shown that it enhances self-efficacy in: u Muscular endurance tasks (Feltz & Chase, 1998) u Rock climbers (Jones et al., 2002 u Golf-putting tasks (Short et al., 2002)

Achievement goal theory was developed in the context of achievement motivation in educational contexts (Nichols, 1984; Dweck, 1992) Central idea: People’s conception of ability was based on 2 personal ‘theories’ about ability (e.g., intelligence) From Dweck’s (1992) theories on classroom achievement motivation? Which statement do you agree with? (A) “I can improve my intelligence” -OR- (B) “I can learn new things, but my intelligence stays pretty much the same” Implicit Theories of Ability: Achievement Goal Theory

(A) “I can get more intelligent” Incremental Theory: Intelligence can be improved through increased effort and practice (B) “I can learn new things, but how intelligent I am stays pretty much the same” Entity Theory: Intelligence is highly stable and not influenced by effort and practice

Achievement Goal Orientation “An a priori framework for how individuals construe achievement situations as well as how they interpret, evaluate, and act on achievement information” (Ames & Archer, 1987, p.409) Implicit Theories of Ability: Achievement Goal Theory

Achievement Goal Theory Achievement Goal Theory (Nicholls, 1989) – Two Types of Goal Orientations: Performance Goals (‘Ego’/‘Competitive’/ ‘Outcome’ Orientation) Motives to achieve at a particular level, usually a socially defined standard; emphasis on outcome; emphasis on performance Learning (Mastery) Goals (‘Task’ Orientation) Motives to increase competence, mastery, or skill; emphasis on developing the skill or technique

Achievement Goals are NOT “Orthogonal” Ego Goal Task Goal High Ego Low Task (vulnerable, maladaptive) High Ego High Task (competitive, adaptive) Low Ego High Task (goal focused, adaptive) Low Ego Low Task (amotivation, maladaptive) Low High Low High

Value of a ‘Task’ Orientation Are ‘trait-like’ Lead to strong ‘work’ ethic, persistence in the face of failure, and optimal performance Affect motivation and persistence in behaviour Can protect from frustration, disappointment, and lack of motivation in face of superior others =ADAPTIVE MOTIVATIONAL PATTERN across many situations/contexts

Problems with an ‘Ego’ Orientation Are ‘trait-like’ Success judged in relation to others only If competence is low, can have difficulty maintaining motivation May reduce efforts, avoid, make excuses for poor performance, cease trying May select tasks that are too easy or too hard to protect self-worth (Duda and Hall, 2001) =MALADAPTIVE MOTIVATIONAL PATTERN across many situations/contexts

Goal Involvement u Although Achievement Goal Orientations are ‘trait-like’, some researchers have rejected this purely generalised, dispositional approach u In addition, much of the research has focused on ‘task orientation’ as the individual difference that makes adaptive motivational patterns in sport (Hodge & Petlitchkoff, 2000) Researchers have increasingly focused on more ‘state like’ views of achievement goals in competitive sport (Harwood, 2002)

Goal Involvement Harwood (2002) suggests individual difference approaches to achievement goals should be complimented with goal involvement Goal involvement reflects ‘state-like’ measures of ‘task’ and ‘ego’ orientations taken during competitive situations Individual goal states may be the mechanism that influences goal orientation at the dispositional level Also, goal involvement means that goals can be changed and manipulated through motivational climate (Harwood, 2002)

Motivational Climate Goal involvement can be manipulated at the situational level through motivational climate Motivational ‘climate’ affects the type of goal orientation that athletes adopt (Harwood, 2002) The ‘climate’ is produced through the communication and organisation of practices and training by sport leaders (Ames, 1992) Coaches, teachers and sports psychologists can therefore facilitate motivation and persistence through the psychological ‘climates’ they create

Motivational Climate u Seifriz et al. (1992) demonstrated that basketballers perceiving the motivational climate as mastery- oriented are more likely to report: u High enjoyment u Low tension u Mastery-oriented climates predict adaptive motivational variables: u Attribution of success to effort (Treasure & Roberts, 1998) u Enjoyment and satisfaction (Boyd et al., 1995) u Intrinsic motivation (Petherick & Weigand, 2002) u Goal attainment (Halliburton & Weiss, 2002) u Self-efficacy (Kavussanu & Roberts, 1996) u Problem-focused coping (Ntoumanis et al., 1999)

How to foster a task/mastery- orientated motivational climate The coach should: Reward hard work Focus the players attention on the correct completion of the skill Focus attention on improvement Help the players learn to solve problems on their own Help players recognize that mistakes are a part of learning The coach should avoid: Negative reinforcement Praising only those who perform the best Focusing on performance alone Encouraging winning all the time

Rewards and reinforcement TangibleIntangible IntrinsicExtrinsic Trophies Medals Money Sponsorship Satisfaction Pride Enjoyment Confidence Self-esteem Recognition e.g. MVP Feedback Verbal praise Encouragement Friendship

Rewards and reinforcement PerformanceProcess High normative Criterion-referenced Improvement Participation Effort Behaviours

u Back to B.F. Skinner (1960) u Positive reinforcement of desired behaviours means that behaviours will continue, e.g. a correctly executed sports skill u Negative reinforcement of undesirable behaviours results in cessation of behaviour and avoids repetition u Avoids complexities negative reinforcement may undermine psychological variables related to motivation and persistence u Reinforcement does not account for internal states and motives of the performer. Rewards and reinforcement

What is Intrinsic Motivation? "Intrinsic motivation refers to motivation to engage in an activity for its own sake. People who are intrinsically motivated work on tasks because they find them enjoyable." Pintrich & Schunk (1994) "Intrinsic motivation is the innate propensity to engage one’s interests and exercise one’s capacities, and, in doing so, to seek out and master optimal challenges. " Reeve, (1995) "Intrinsic motivation is choosing to do an activity for no compelling reason, beyond the satisfaction derived from the activity itself--it’s what motivates us to do something when we don’t have to do anything." Raffini (1995)

What is Intrinsic Motivation? "Intrinsically-motivated action is that which occurs for its own sake, action for which the only rewards are the spontaneous affects and cognitions that accompany it. Intrinsically motivated behaviours require no external supports or reinforcements for their sustenance." Wlodkowski (1998) “Intrinsically-motivated people engage in sport to gain a sense of competence, self-determination, and autonomy, and persist in the absence of any external reinforcement“ Deci and Ryan (1985)

Where Does Intrinsic Motivation Come From? u Theories of motivation must account for behaviours that are motivated by “rewards that do not reduce tissue needs” (Eisenberger, 1972) u Motivational theory must therefore reach beyond mere reinforcement and biological drives (Deci & Ryan, 1985) u Lewin (1951) was very influential in developing cognitive approaches to psychology and introducing intention and will as important motivational constructs

u “Cognitive theories set the stage for the study of self-determination by introducing the concepts of behavioural decision-making (i.e., intentionality) and control over outcomes” (Deci & Ryan, 1985) u De Charms (1968) was very influential in initiating ideas of intrinsic motivation and perceptions of personal causation u The basic desire to control one’s fate – to be a causal agent – rather than be controlled – to be a pawn - is a contributing factor in all motivated behaviour (De Charms, 1968) Where Does Intrinsic Motivation Come From?

Cognitive Evaluation Theory: Classic Research on Intrinsic Motivation u Deci (1971, 1972) College students offered money for solving problems, while another group of students just solved the problems without any external reward  unpaid students spent more time solving the problems in free time Deci (1971, 1972) u Lepper, Greene, and Nisbett (1973) effect of extrinsic rewards on children's’ intrinsic interest and motivation Lepper, Greene, and Nisbett (1973) Method  One group of children asked to draw pictures and rewards promised for pictures and rewards promised for the best drawing (reward condition) the best drawing (reward condition)  Another group drew pictures, without the promise of a reward without the promise of a reward (non- rewarded condition) (non- rewarded condition)  Another group drew pictures  Another group drew pictures and given a surprise reward (unexpected reward condition) reward condition) % time spent drawing

Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation u Results suggest that IM is undermined by extrinsic, tangible rewards (‘undermining effect’ – Deci and Ryan, 1980) u “When a behaviour is controlled by events such as rewards, the behaviour only tends to persist so longs as the controlling events are present” Deci and Ryan (1987)

Research Trends and the ‘Undermining Effect’ u Deci, Koestner and Ryan (1999) u Meta-analysis of 128 studies on effects of rewards on intrinsic motivation u Average ‘effect size’ (d) of undermining effect for  Engagement-contingent rewards d = -.40  Completion-contingent rewards d = -.36  Performance-contingent rewards d = -.28 u Undermining effect very strong across studies Deci, Koestner and Ryan (1999), Psychological Bulletin, 6,

Context, Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation u Performance contingent rewards and way in which it is present can affect intrinsic motivation u $3 reward presented in 2 conditions: u C1: “Performed well” u C2: “Performed well, as you should” u Participants in C1 reported more intrinsic motivation than C2: Autonomy supportive environments most effective and CONTENT of feedback is important.

Athletes and Rewards “The Ballon d’Or is one of the most prestigious individual awards. You can’t ignore it. But, with no disrespect to anybody, the recognition of my peers is more important to me. Doing it for one season is easy. To stay at the top, you have to get up early and do your work. People are always waiting for you to slip up. The more you prove the harder it gets. But you have to stay on top. I came into football to win titles, not to win the Ballon d’Or. Even if the reward is enormous and I would be happy to win it.” Thierry Henry, November, 2006

Positive Reinforcement and Intrinsic Motivation u Positive feedback i.e. encouragement, praise is important because it enhances COMPETENCE and SELF-ESTEEM u Results are mixed: some show that positive feedback intrinsic motivations, others say it undermines it or has no effect (Vallerand & Reid, 1984) u Ryan (1982) suggests that positive reinforcement can assist ONLY when it is presented in an autonomy supportive way – avoid ‘controlling language’ like ‘should’ and ‘must’

Positive Reinforcement and Intrinsic Motivation in Sports Contexts u Vallerand and Reid (1984, 1988) conducted experiments using a stabliometer (motor task) u Task presented in either: u Positive feedback condition: “It looks like you have a very natural ability to balance and it shows in your performance” u Negative feedback condition: “This is an easy task but your progress is quite slow. Try to perform as well as you can” u Results indicated that IM was higher among those in the positive feedback condition and this was consistent for males and females

u Findings of Vallerand and Reid (1984, 1988) also indicate that competence MEDIATES the effect of feedback on intrinsic motivation: Verbal Feedback Intrinsic Motivation Competence Feelings u Positive feedback makes athletes feel more competence and results in increased IM Positive Reinforcement and Intrinsic Motivation in Sports Contexts

Cognitive Evaluation Theory Intrinsic motivation, context (autonomous-controlling) and content of feedback (competence enhancing-not enhancing) combined to form a theory External locus of causality Intrinsic motivation decreases Cause of behaviour lies outside person Intrinsic motivation increases Cause of behaviour lies inside person Internal locus of causality Positive competence information Intrinsic motivation decreases Increased perceived competence Intrinsic motivation increases Decreased perceived competence Negative competence information Controlling Aspect of Reward Informational Aspect of Reward

Cognitive Evaluation Theory u How the recipient perceives rewards is critical in determining whether their intrinsic motivation will be enhanced or diminished (Deci & Ryan, 1985) u Rewards that are perceived to control an athlete’s behaviour (i.e., perceived as emanating outside a person) or suggest that an individual is not competent decrease intrinsic motivation u Rewards that are perceived as emphasising the informational aspect (i.e., perceived as coming from inside the individual) or provide positive feedback that supports competence increase intrinsic motivation

Cognitive Evaluation Theory and the Functional Significance of Events PERCEIVED LOCUS OF CAUSALITY CONTROLLING INFORMATIONAL COMPETENCE INFORMATION EFFECT ON INTRINSIC MOTIVATION ENHANCES INTRINSIC MOTIVATION DECREASES INTRINSIC MOTIVATION EXTERNALINTERNAL SOURCES OF INFORMATION PARENTAL PRESSURE TANGIBLE REWARDS TASK OR PERFORMANCE CONTINGENT REWARDS PARENTAL SUPPORT POSITIVE FEEDBACK TASK NON-CONTINGENT REWARDS

Increasing Intrinsic Motivation u Provide successful experiences u Extrinsic/tangible rewards should be non- contingent on performance but informational u Verbal and nonverbal praise (positive feedback) u Vary content of training/practice u Involve participants in decision making (choice) u Realistic, personal, negotiated, goal setting (Vallerand, 2007; Ryan & Deci, 2007)