Does intrinsic motivation enhance motor cortex excitability?

Abstract

Intrinsic motivation (IM) is often viewed as a spontaneous tendency for action. Recent behavioral and neuroimaging evidence indicate that IM, in comparison to extrinsic motivation (EM), solicits the motor system. Accordingly, we tested whether IM leads to greater excitability of the motor cortex than EM. To test this hypothesis, we used two different tasks to induce the motivational orientation using either words representing each motivational orientation or pictures previously linked to each motivational orientation through associative learning. Single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation over the motor cortex was applied when viewing the stimuli. Electromyographic activity was recorded on the contracted first dorsal interosseous muscle. Two indexes of corticospinal excitability (the amplitude of motor-evoked potential and the length of cortical silent period) were obtained through unbiased automatic detection and analyzed using a mixed model that provided both statistical power and a high level of control over all important individual, task, and stimuli characteristics. Across the two tasks and the two indices of corticospinal excitability, the exposure to IM-related stimuli did not lead to a greater corticospinal excitability than EM-related stimuli or than stimuli with no motivational valence (ps > .20). While these results tend to dismiss the advantage of IM at activating the motor cortex, we suggest alternative hypotheses to explain this lack of effect, which deserves further research.

Volition motivates cognitive performance at the response-execution level by attenuating task-irrelevant motor activations

“…Moreover, having voluntary choices is favorable (Luo et al, 2022a;Patall et al, 2008) and inherently rewarding, which may elicit reward-like activations in the brain (Leotti & Delgado, 2011;Murayama et al, 2015;Murty et al, 2015), echoing the intrinsic motivation that is closely related to positive experiences and inherent reward (Murayama et al, 2008). Intrinsic motivation is often viewed as a spontaneous tendency for action (Radel et al, 2016), which provides an advantage to engage in actions and recruits the motor system (Murayama et al, 2016). At the neural level, compared with stimulus-driven actions, voluntary actions induce stronger activity in the supplementary motor area (SMA) (Cunnington et al, 2002;Deiber et al, 1999) which is a key area of the motor system for generating voluntary actions and is associated with the experience of volition (Haggard, 2019).…”

A Scrutiny of the Role of Knowledge Management in Employees’ Organizational Culture, Motivation, and Success

“…In humanities, researchers have always been concerned with the motivation of individuals in various contexts including the occupational contexts. Radel et al [26] defined motivation as the reason behind the individuals' initiation, continuation, and termination of various behaviors at specific points in time. As they explained, motivation can be explained in terms of specific states that range from the strongest to the weakest states.…”

Classroom Culture When Students are Reluctant to Learn Online: Student Dissent Behaviors Explained by Their Self-Efficacy, Control of Learning, and Intrinsic Motivation

“…Intrinsic motivation can be defined as the enjoyment of and interest in an activity for the sake of engaging in that activity (Cury et al, 2006). Intrinsically motivated individuals will embrace tasks willingly, as they expect their involvement to lead to more enjoyment (Radel et al, 2016). Intrinsic motivation has been found to influence an individual's behavior and self-determination (Ng, 2018), often resulting in students exerting more effort (Ali et al, 2010).…”

“…Therefore, the following is hypothesized: H11: Intrinsic motivation and COLB will be positively correlated Perceptions of classroom justice influence students' emotions about the environment (Horan, 2010) and can affect students' motivation and affective learning (Chory-Assad, 2002). Therefore, the following are hypothesized: H12: Procedural justice and COLB will be positively correlated H13: Distributive justice and COLB will be positively correlated H14: Interactional justice and COLB will be positively correlated Because instructor traits such as friendliness, openness, professionalism, and investing in students increase student likelihood to participate (Abdullah et al, 2012), and a dissatisfaction of instructor behaviors such as instructor misbehaviors can reduce student participation (Goodboy and Bolkan, 2009), the following are hypothesized: H15: Instructor relevance and participation will be positively correlated H16: Instructor clarity and participation will be positively correlated Students who have high levels of self-efficacy are more likely to engage in the course (Hoigaard et al, 2015), while intrinsically motivated students have greater interest in the material and willingness to embrace the task (Cury et al, 2006;Radel et al, 2016). Therefore, the following are hypothesized.…”