Facilitating Feelings of Self-Determination and Intrinsic Motivation in Athletes

1
Facilitating Feelings of Self-Determination and
Intrinsic Motivation in Athletes

• Tony Amorose, Ph.D.
• Illinois State University

2
Questions?
Why do people get involved in sport? Why do they
continue to participate?
3
Common Motives for Sport Participation

• competence (learn and improve, reach goals)
• affiliation (make new friends, be with friends)
• fitness (get or stay in shape, look good)
• team aspects (being part of group)
• competition (to win, be successful)
• fun (excitement, challenge, action)

4
The Nature of Motivation According to
Self-Determination Theory

• motives can be classified along a continuum of
  self-determination

5
Continuum of Self-Determination
non self-determined
self-determined
Intrinsic Motivation Extrinsic Motivation Extrinsic Motivation Extrinsic Motivation Extrinsic Motivation Amotivation
Intrinsic Motivation integrated regulation identified regulation introjected regulation external regulation Amotivation
6
Intrinsic Motivation (IM)

• engaging in an activity for its own sake (e.g.,
  for the fun, pleasure, or sense of personal
  mastery provided by the task itself)
• types of intrinsic motivation
• IM to know
• IM to accomplish
• IM to experience stimulation

7
Extrinsic Motivation (EM)

• engaging in an activity for instrumental reasons
  (e.g., for rewards, social approval, please
  others, personal pressure or goals)
• types of extrinsic motivation
• integrated regulation
• identified regulation
• introjected regulation
• external regulation

8
Amotivation (AM)

• a state of lacking intention to act, and thus the
  relative absence of motivation

9
Question?
How would you classify these motives?
10
Why Do You Practice Your Sport?
For the excitement I feel when I am really involved in the activity.
For the prestige of being an athlete.
Because I would feel bad if I was not taking time to do it.
For the pleasure it gives me to know more about the sport I practice.
Because it is one of the best ways I have chosen to develop other aspects of myself.
It is not clear to me anymore I dont think my place is in sport anymore.
11

• Important Points
• people have multiple motives
• likely a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic
  reasons
• Key Questions
• which reasons are most important?
• do you participate primarily for intrinsic or
  extrinsic reasons?

12
Motivational Orientation

• intrinsic motivational orientation
• participating primarily for intrinsic reasons
  (i.e., self-determined reasons)
• extrinsic motivational orientation
• participating primarily for extrinsic reasons
  (i.e., more non self-determined reasons)

QuestionWhich are You?
13
Question?
Does it matter if we are more intrinsically or
extrinsically motivated?
14
Potential Benefits

• Those with an intrinsic motivational orientation
  (i.e., more self-determined motivation) are more
  likely to
• consistently demonstrate motivated behavior
  (i.e., choice, effort, persistence)
• experience greater enjoyment
• experience lower anxiety
• exhibit greater learning and performance
• demonstrate better concentration
• be creative in their activities

15
Question?
How can we promote or facilitate intrinsic
motivation in sport participants?
16
Wonder Years Video
Describe Pauls motivated behavior at the
beginning, middle, and end of the
show. Speculate on the primary reasons why Paul
participates at these points in the show
(intrinsic vs. extrinsic). What are some
specific factors (personal, situational) that may
have contributed to the change in Pauls
motivation?
17
Self-Determination Theory (SDT)
Basic Premise the fulfillment of the basic needs
of competence, autonomy, and relatedness are
essential for the facilitation of self-determined
motivation, social development, and personal
well-being
18
Three Basic Needs

• need for competence
• the need to interact effectively with the
  environment
• need for autonomy (self-determination)
• the need to engage in activities of ones
  choosing and to be the origin of ones behavior
• need for relatedness
• the need to feel connected to others and to
  experience a sense of belongingness

19
Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET)

• sub-theory within SDT
• goal is to specify conditions that support or
  undermine IM
• IM will be maximized if individuals feel
  competent and autonomous

20
Key Point
Any event (external or internal) which can affect
perceived competence or self-determination will
ultimately impact IM Possible events?
rewards imposed goals
competition feedback
surveillance leadership
deadlines others?
21
Functional Aspect of Events

• 1. controlling aspect
• related to feeling or autonomy or
  self-determination

22
Functional Aspect of Events

• 2. informational aspect
• related to feelings of competence

23
Important Point
It is the functional significance of the events
that will impact IM Which aspect is most
important or salient to the individual? How does
the individual perceive the event?
24
Other Important Points

• IM is only evident for activities that are
• personally interesting
• provide optimal challenges
• changes in perceived competence will only affect
  IM under conditions where the one feels
  autonomous
• relatedness has a more distal affect on IM

25
Research on IM

• rewards
• competition
• coaching/instructor feedback
• leadership styles and behaviors

26
Research on Rewards and IM
Basic Procedures of Lab Research

• Random Assignment to Groups
• control (no reward)
• experimental (received reward for participation)
• Perform an Interesting Task (e.g., puzzle, game)
• Experimental Group Receives Reward
• Experimenter Leaves
• Free Choice Period
• Time Spent on Task as Measure of IM

27

• Results
• Those receiving a reward spend significantly less
  time participating in free choice period
• Conclusion
• Rewards undermine IM

28
Potential Problems?

1. Lab-based (not real world of sport)
2. Alternative reasons for participating during the
   free choice period
3. Others?

29
Scholarships and IM
Ryan (1977)

• Purpose
• To determine whether scholarship and
  non-scholarship athletes differed on level of IM
• Method
• male football players
• scholarship
• non-scholarship
• Measures
• IM (i.e., enjoyment, free time spent practicing,
  participate without scholarship?)

30

• Results
• scholarship athletes reported lower IM
• IM decreased every year the athletes had
  scholarship
• Conclusion
• scholarship (rewards) undermine IM

31
Ryan (1980)
replicated earlier study but examined football
players, wrestlers, and female athletes from a
variety of sports

• Basic Results
• scholarship football players reported lower IM
  than non-scholarship football players
• scholarship wrestlers and female athletes
  reported higher IM than non-scholarship athletes

How can you explain these results?
32
Explanation of Results Using CET

• wrestlers and female athletes
• scholarships provided positive competence
  information given number of scholarships
  available
• ? perceived competence ? ? IM
• football players
• scholarships provided no competence information
  given number of scholarships available, rather
• scholarships viewed as controlling
• ? self-determination ? ? IM

33
Conclusions

1. rewards are not necessarily bad, rather it
   depends on how they are perceived
2. there are conditions where rewards are not
   detrimental to IM (e.g., rewards given contingent
   to performance or achievement)
3. rewards will not undermine IM if there was no
   interest in the activity in the first place

34
Research on IM

• rewards
• competition
• coaching/instructor feedback
• leadership styles and behaviors

35
Leadership Styles and IM
Question? How should the following leadership
styles influence athletes IM?
36
Hollembeak and Amorose (in press)

• Purpose
• To test whether perceived competence, autonomy,
  and relatedness mediate the relationship between
  athletes perceptions of their coaches behavior
  and the athletes IM
• To determine the specific coaching behaviors that
  are positively or negatively related to IM

37

• Methods
• Participants
• Division I college athletes (M age 19.73)
• male (n 146)
• female (n 134)
• various individual and team sports
• years of participation (M 10.19, SD 1.36)
• years with current coach (M 1.40, SD 1.42)

38

• Measures
• perceived coaching behaviors (LSS)
• intrinsic motivation (SMS)
• fundamental needs according to SDT
• perceived competence
• autonomy
• relatedness

39

• Results
• mediational effect of needs
• coaching behaviors as positive or negative
  predictors of IM

40
Full Model
Training and Instruction
Perceived Competence
Positive Feedback
Autocratic Behavior
Intrinsic Motivation
Autonomy
Democratic Behavior
Relatedness
Social Support
Model is a perfect fit!
41
Mediational Model
Training and Instruction
Perceived Competence
Positive Feedback
Autocratic Behavior
Intrinsic Motivation
Autonomy
Democratic Behavior
Relatedness
Social Support
42
Hypothesized Model
Training and Instruction
Perceived Competence
Positive Feedback
Autocratic Behavior
Intrinsic Motivation
Autonomy
Democratic Behavior
Relatedness
Social Support
43
Modified Mediational Model
Training and Instruction
.13
.98
-.16
Perceived Competence
Positive Feedback
.11
-.13
.64
.78
.19
Autocratic Behavior
Intrinsic Motivation
.32
-.40
Autonomy
-.13
.92
Democratic Behavior
.43
.25
Relatedness
Social Support
.06
44

• Results
• mediational effect of needs
• coaching behaviors as positive or negative
  predictors of IM

• groups differences in pattern of relationships?

45

• Limitations
• only considered IM
• other behaviors that may impact motivation
• Practical Implications
• democratic coaching styles may facilitate more
  intrinsically motivated athletes

46
Summary

• IM affected by perceptions of competence,
  autonomy, and relatedness
• important given benefits of IM orientation
• SDT is practical in sense that we can use this
  information to facilitate IM

47
Question?

• How can we promote or facilitate
• perceived competence
• autonomy
• relatedness