Joshua H.

Tuguinay
MS Psychology I
Advanced Dynamic Psychology

Reflection Paper

Models of Human Motivation

Motivation is the ultimate force that causes you to take action. Not only does it initiate and drive goal-
oriented behavior, but it also sustains it. The actions can be as simple as learning how to ride a bicycle, or
as complex as finishing a Doctorate degree. Every action has a certain motivation behind it. The driving
forces behind human motivation can be biological, emotional, social, or personal in nature. Over the years,
Social Scientists and Psychologists have tried to find the answer to what motivates people to act and
behave the way they do. Years of research and experiments have resulted in four (4) prevalent models or
theories of human motivation – Instinct, Arousal, Psychodynamic, and Cognitive theories. While every
theory tries to explain the driving forces behind motivation within a limited scope, all of them have certain
common elements.

I will start my reflection on the Instinct Theory of Motivation. The Instinct Theory of Motivation suggests
that a person’s significant nature was already established at birth and that his/her actions would largely
be influenced by that nature. Thus, from birth, a person is already programmed and that he/she must
operate according to that specific program.

I think that the so-called “instincts”, the innate drives in persons that result in unlearned behavior, is good
in describing behavior but not in explaining behavior. Saying something is an "instinct" really doesn't say
much, save for providing a description of a behavior. An example is the reaction of a man when presented
with a large snake. Chances are there will be heart palpitations, sweating, and agitation, but these only
describe behavior. What really is causing the reaction? Further, some of these reactions might be
attributed to another stimulus, such as a hot day, realization that the person is not protected, and so
forth. Additionally, not everyone has the same reaction to a certain stimulus. In the case of the snake,
some people having an affinity with snakes will not have the same reactions as with other people.
Ascertaining whether the same stimulus will have the same effect on people has to be verified within a
very controlled environment, same stimulus under the same conditions.

The Arousal Theory of Motivation suggests that people take certain actions to either decrease or increase
levels of arouse. One of the assertions of the arousal theory of motivation is that our levels of arousal
have an influence on our performance. An example is a teenager who feels low or frustrated tend to go
to clubs or hang out with friends, or a teenager who is in love sex having a hard time sleeping. Also,
according to this theory, we are motivated to maintain an optimal level of arousal, and the level of arousal
varies widely with different sorts of people.

Basically, the Arousal Theory of Motivation is quite similar to and borrows some concepts from Clark Hull’s
Drive Reduction Theory of Motivation. However, while Hull’s theory focuses on a reduction of tension as
the basis of motivation, the Arousal Theory emphasizes the importance of a balance in arousal levels.
While the drive-reduction theory focuses primarily on biological needs as motivators, arousal theory
examines the influence of the neurotransmitter dopamine as a motivator in the body. The Arousal Theory
expands upon drive-reduction theory by taking into account levels of arousal as potential motivators.

The psychodynamic perspective on motivation emphasizes the role of the unconscious and underlying
mechanisms on our mental processes including motivation. Traditional views of motivation propose that
individuals consciously choose to perform behavior to achieve a specific goal. The psychodynamic
perspective questions this simple view of human motivation and states the role of the unconscious is
fundamental to understanding why one behaves the way they do and how behavioral motivation effects
daily functioning and quality of life. Human motivation and behavior is a result of multiple goals and
constructs including an individual’s personality, experiences, their environment and the people around
them. The Psychodynamic perspective proposes that motivation is a mixture of conscious and
unconscious constructs. If all motivations were conscious and an individual was aware of these, goal-
directed behavior would inevitably be disrupted and negatively influence daily functioning.

The psychodynamic perspective differentiates between explicit and implicit motivation. Explicit
motivation is the conscious representation of an individual’s mental state. Implicit motivation is changes
in experiences, thoughts and behavior as a consequence of our motives without our conscious awareness.

The psychodynamic perspective on motivation has added much to the field of unconscious motivation.
However, I think that it is inherently negative view of an individual’s internal life as it proposes that we
are unaware of the motivations that drive our behavior, and because of this we lack control over our own
thoughts, motivations and behavior. The psychodynamic perspective also states that our early
experiences and relationships influence us beyond our control, and an individual must live with these
effects for the rest of their life. Additionally, the unconscious is a difficult concept to define and measure
thus, it’s foundations are not scientifically sound or objective.

The previous three perspectives considered some form or another of a biological basis for motivation. The
cognitive approach focuses on the rationality and decision-making capacities of humans. Cognitive
theories of motivation also rely on thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes to explain motivation. Collectively,
these are called, “cognitions.” According to this theory, motivations can be intrinsic (based on internal
factors) or extrinsic (based on external incentives). For individuals with intrinsic motivation, receiving
external rewards may actually reduce their motivation, because of the way in which they interpret the
reward. Overall, intrinsic motivation is more effective than extrinsic motivation, particularly if the
behaviors are part of complex and long-term goals.

Cognitive theories of motivation have been dominated by a very simple idea, namely that the intensity or
persistence of behavior is determined by a combination of the value of the goal the person is trying to
achieve and the expectancy that some behavior will be effective in attaining that goal. Little effort will be
expended when the goal is unimportant or when the behavior is seen as unlikely to achieve the desired
ends. Sometimes the goal is very attractive, such as overcoming life-Iong shyness, but the expectancy that
one will change is too small to encourage social experimentation. Similarly, little effort might be exerted
to overcome a tic or nervous habit because, although confident of success, the individual did not consider
it sufficiently important to compensate for the stigma of referral to a psychologist or psychiatrist.

While all these approaches and theories separate biological, cognitive, and social influences, in reality all
these factors are interrelated, and that all of these approaches are significant in understanding human
motivation.