Testing the Hierarchical Model of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation at the Situational Level

Motivation is defined as the direction, intensity and persistence of an individual’s participation in an activity (Heckert et al. 2000; Locke and Latham 2002; Moreira et al. 2002). Motivation is vital for performance and encompasses a range of processes and desires (Maslow 1970; Beck 1983; Wentzel 1999). These desires stimulate an action or behaviour, caused and directed by motives where the individual identifies and prioritises goals to be achieved (Deci and Ryan 2000, 2008; Roberts et al. 2004). Motivation experienced at a given moment in time for a specific activity is termed situational motivation (Vallerand 2000) and has not been as thoroughly investigated as contextual level motivation (LaChausse 2006). Traditionally motivation theories have lacked an appropriate framework for addressing the complex processes of situational motivation (Nygård 1981; Veermans and Tapola 2004). However the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (HMIEM; Vallerand 2000) extended self-determination theory (SDT) and suggests specific processes for a situational level of motivation as well as for contextual and global motivational processes (Vallerand 2000). The HMIEM shows affect, behaviour and cognition as a consequence of motivation similarly at all three levels of generality. Although it may be that, at the situational level, affect plays a more significant role as an antecedent which is not necessarily mirrored at the contextual or global levels of the HMIEM (Linnenbrink and Pintrich 2002; Hardy and Gustavo 2005; Barnett 2006). The aims of this thesis are to identify factors relating to situational motivation; to assess changes in situational motivation and to investigate the processes of situational motivation during activity.
The first study investigated motivation between different sports personality types using a cross sectional design. Participants (n=239), who regularly participated in sports sessions, completed the Sport Motivation Scale (SMS; Pelletier et al. 1995) and an adapted Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI; Eysenck and Eysenck 1964). Results showed that extroverted athletes reported significantly higher intrinsic motivation (IM) than introverted athletes (p = .006) more specifically this was IM-to accomplish (p = .029) and IM-to experience stimulation (p = .001). Athletes high in neuroticism showed significantly more amotivation than their more stable counterparts (p = .001). The findings suggest that some sports participants can experience neuroticism which is also related to high levels of amotivation. Extroverted athletes may focus on utilising both intrinsic and extrinsic motives, in line with Roberts et al. (2004), resulting in higher levels of overall motivation for this study. Introverted athletes showed less intrinsic motivation than expected which may demonstrate a conflict between the internal focus of the introvert and the extrinsic nature of sport as discussed by Hong and O’Neil (2001) and Pushkar et al. (2002).
To explore changes in situational motivation over a short period of time, study two employed a two-way between-within subject design. Experienced and less experienced Pilates participants (n=54) completed pre- and post-session Situational Motivation Scales (Guay et al. 2000), the Worcester Affect Scale (WAS; Rhoden and West 2010) and goal achievement information over 4 weeks. Unexpectedly, there were no significant differences between experienced and beginners’ levels of intrinsic or extrinsic motivation for Pilates. Both experienced participants and less experienced participants reported significant increases in IM over time (p = .010). There were increases in the percentage of participants across both groups who recorded pre-session goals, in week 1, thirteen participants reported positive goal achievement but did not report a pre-session goal. There were significant increases in positive affect (PA, p = .001) pre- to post-session and decreases in negative affect (NA p = .004) pre- to post-session for both experienced and less experienced groups. Optimal situational motivation for unfamiliar situations may require a more structured environment where specific information is delivered, and/or a secure environment where individuals can explore their responses. Increased IM may be due to the non-competitive nature of Pilates, although the positive effects of goal achievement may feed into future IM for the remaining sessions through the internalisation process (Standage et al. 2008).
The processes of situational motivation were examined in study three by monitoring goal progression and affect during cycle time-trial performance. Seven well-trained cyclists performed two laboratory time trials on a kingcycle ergometer on two separate occasions. Situational motivation (SIMS; Guay et al. 2000), affect (WAS; Rhoden and West 2010) and goal data were collected pre- and post trial using previously validated measures and open questions. Affect and goal achievement were also collected throughout the trial using likert scale measures. Data were analysed individually and single case responses show 5 participants reported an increase in intrinsic motivation after riding their fast trial. Participants also differed in their perceptions of success, P1 rated both trials as successful even though their slowest trial was 83 seconds slower possibly due to achieving their pre-trial goal. Those who perceived themselves as successful also report higher confidence to achieve their goal (GC) from 15 km until the end of the trial. Positive affect during the fast trials was significantly higher than for the slow trials from the start (p = .001) and NA was significantly lower for the first trials also from the start of the trial (p = .001). The lack of change in situational motivation pre- to post-trial suggests that the hierarchical model demonstrates contextual and global motivation but does not represent situational motivation processes accurately. Feelings of satisfaction, associated with intrinsic motivation, can take time to assimilate into an overall motivational orientation (Lonsdale et al. 2009). However, despite no immediate motivational change, affect significantly differed from the start of the perceived successful trials, suggesting that at the situational level, affect is an important construct during time-trial performance. Thus perceived goal progress and affect may be better indicators of situational motivation than more general orientations of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
Study four further examined the processes of situational motivation including affect and goal progress, through direct competition during a badminton tournament. Participants (n=16) were county level badminton players in a mixed doubles tournament who completed a number of motivational (SIMS; Guay et al. 2000), goal and affect (WAS; Rhoden and West 2010) measures between games and matches throughout a tournament. Part way through the tournament, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation differed significantly between successful (top 4 finishers) and unsuccessful (bottom 4 finishers) players (p=.028). Whilst negative affect (p=.029), goal confidence (p=.028) and goal discrepancy (p=.028) changed significantly straight after the first game was played. These findings do not lend support for the hierarchical model which assumes that affect, behaviour and cognition are only consequences of situational motivation (Gillet et al. 2009). Taken together, the findings from the studies in this thesis suggest that there are important self-regulatory processes such as goal confidence, goal setting, and affect which may operate in a cyclical manner. These factors may have an influence on the processes of situational motivation which may be different from that suggested with the HMIEM.