Enhancing and Undermining Intrinsic Motivation: The Effects of Task‐involving and Ego‐involving Evaluation on Interest and Performance

Abstract

SIIWIARY. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that intrinsic motivation will be differentially affected by task-involving and ego-involving evaluation, and that provision of both kinds of evaluation will promote ego-involvement rather than task-involvement. Twelve classes of fifth and sixth grade pupils were randomly assigned to one of three feedback conditions. Pupils received either ego-involving numerical grades or taskinvolving individual comments or both after performing interesting tasks, one convergent and one divergent, on each of two sessions. Interest and performance for 132 randomly selected pupils of high or low school achievement were measured at pre-test, during the manipulation and at a third session, when no further evaluation was anticipated. As hypothesised, interest and performance on both tasks at both levels of school achievement were highest after comments, both when further comments were anticipated and when they were not. Grades and grades plus comments had similar and generally undermining effects on both interest and performance, although high achievers who received grades maintained high interest and convergent thinking when further grades were anticipated. These results are discussed in terms of the contribution of this distinction between task and ego-involvement to further understanding of intrinsically motivated activity. INTRODUCTIONRECENT research on intrinsic motivation has consistently found that rewards undermine subsequent interest for initially attractive tasks, apparently by promoting attributions of task engagement to the reward rather than to pleasure in the activity itself (see recent reviews by Lepper, 1983;Morgan, 1984). However, less attention has been directed to clarifying how initial interest can be maintained, or possibly even enhanced. Cognitive evaluation theory (Deci, 1975; Deci and Ryan, 1980) maintains that interest will not be undermined by rewards which are perceived as providing positive information about competence rat her than as sources of control. However, Harackiewicz, et al. (1984) note that this prediction has not received consistent empirical support and suggest that this may be because the mechanism by which positive information is supposed to enhance interest remains unclear.Similar concerns have been expressed by several researchers who argue that theories which focus primarily on the implications of exogenous perceptions of causality for task resumption have shed little light o n the ways in which the experience and process of task engagement may differ under intrinsic or extrinsic conditions (Csziksentmihalyi, 1975;Maehr, 1976, Condry, 1977deCharms, 1983 Greene and Lepper, 1974) suggested that rewards may undermine creative or divergent thinking, these findings seemed compatible with general behaviour theory and had little impact o n conceptualisations of intrinsic motivation. Moreover, later studies tended to find that performance was largely unrelated either to the presence or absence of rewards or to increases or decreases in subs...

Internal medicine fellowship directors’ perspectives on the quality and utility of letters conforming to residency program director letter of recommendation guidelines

“…Prior efforts to enforce a ranking component of a standardized LOR have led to misleading inflation; for example, in a sample of standardized faculty LORs for emergency medicine residency, > 95% of applicants were ranked in the top third relative to their peers [13]. A formal ranking of residents may also result in a more competitive, less collegial residency environment that could be deleterious to learning and resident wellness [14–16]. Finally, as grading schemata are inherently subjective, the residency PD priorities – including weighting of particular applicant characteristics – may not match the priorities of the fellowship PD, rendering the grading system unhelpful in judging fit for a particular fellowship.…”

The Role of Scoring In Formative Assessment of Second Language Writing

“…Although the difference in elaboration was not statistically significant, the students in the scoring class were likely to elaborate on in a larger scale and in a more global level than those in the non-scoring class. Similar to high achievers in Butler (1988), the participants in this study are considered the best students in Korea. All are attending the most prestigious university in Korea and thus may be highly competitive, with a strong drive to succeed.…”

“…For instance, Butler (1988) is often cited in the writing literature to support the claim that grading undermines student interest level as well as task performance, but his high-achieving students' interest levels were not negatively affected by receiving grades. He examined the task performance of 22 low achieving elementary students and 22 high achieving students by dividing them into three groups: one group received only comments, a second group received both comments and grades, and the third group received grades only.…”

“…Moreover, students of varying ages and cultures, and across different subject areas may have different perceptions and attitudes towards grading. While Butler (1988) found that grading negatively affected elementary student performance, Martinez and Martinez (1992) found positive effects of frequent grading on the performance of 120 American college students in algebra tests. Therefore, different students will have different perceptions and motivational levels regarding the effects of grading.…”

“…Compared to the more traditional summative assessment, conducted at the end of instruction to gauge student learning outcomes, formative assessment, defined as ongoing assessment with the aim of improving student learning through tailored teaching, is gaining popularity (Bloom, Hastings, & Madaus, 1971;Butler, 1988). While scores or grades are often used in summative assessment, they are often discouraged in formative assessment because they are thought to hinder learning by increasing learner anxiety.…”