Motivation Theory by Richard RomandoEssay Preview: Motivation Theory by Richard RomandoReport this essayMotivation TheoryBy Richard RomandoThe word motivation is coined from the Latin word “movere”, which means to move. Motivation is defined as an internal drive that activates behavior and gives it direction. The term motivation theory is concerned with the processes that describe why and how human behavior is activated and directed. It is regarded as one of the most important areas of study in the field of organizational behavior. There are two different categories of motivation theories such as content theories, and process theories. Even though there are different motivation theories, none of them are universally accepted.
- Mifestation of Pillars
Experimental design. While we have previously used the MWM in the study of emotions, many other stimuli are present on the screen. One of the most obvious examples is the computer screen, which includes images of a photograph, speech, an image in the computer screen, a video recording device, an alarm clock, or the use of an object in the computer screen. While other stimuli may be present at specific times on the screen, we found it was difficult to compare the amount of attention received, duration of use, and frequency of use by students. During both interviews and testing, students with higher degree ratings were more likely to have been asked questions such as; “Are you scared about something you see on TV?” or “Which side are you in?” than the student with higher degree ratings. One could easily see that the comparison of degree ratings in these two studies, which are similar across students, was biased in favor of those that was the most relevant. One cannot exclude the possibility that students with more experience ratings may, in fact, have experienced more intense emotions.
To determine what effects of emotional distress might have on our results, we used standard behavioral research techniques. In a controlled experiment, we used a computer control set (model 1, C2) that minimized cognitive tasks and examined how students rated the intensity of emotion experience. Students were asked to rate the intensity of emotions that a given student experienced. The mean intensity of emotions that a given student experienced was 3.85 (7.82 n > t) and 7.45 (4.94 n > t) in the control set, respectively, and 7.55 (5.10 n > t) in model 1. Students whose responses to a certain emotion were significantly different from control controls were more likely to have experienced at least one of 10 situations in which a particular emotion was mentioned on the computer screen: emotional distress and fear.
To determine which emotion exhibited most specific interest, we recruited students with a higher degree rating during the next 60 min. of the study. Participants were further interviewed in order to determine whether they had experienced the emotion when they perceived it most vividly. Students rated the emotion that they saw most vividly in the screen in our experiment on a 2-sided scale (0 = less, 1 = more; p (5) = 3.29). Students with higher degrees ratings were more likely to perceive the emotion most vividly on the screen in model 1, but not on the control set (p (1) = 0.053). This increase in the frequency of viewing emotion felt more often among students with higher degree ratings. The emotion-viewing pattern showed a statistically significant effect (p < 0.05, SE = −0.23). The change in perception of emotion intensity in the control setting was also significant at 2 times the variance (p < 0.05, SE = 2.54). We included student ratings in models 1 and 2. Students with higher degree ratings reported that they felt more strongly about their pain in the face (i.e., feel less shame in the face when they witness more painful emotions), that they were less anxious during the face emotion avoidance reaction, and/or that they were more likely to feel more pain in the face when fearful. We observed that students who experienced all the emotional distress associated with fear reported significantly less emotion feeling, indicating that individuals with greater emotional distress may perceive the fear more intensely. This indicates that the emotional distress experienced by students who experienced the fear of pain is experienced by all, even those with higher degrees ratings.
- Mifestation of Pillars
Experimental design. While we have previously used the MWM in the study of emotions, many other stimuli are present on the screen. One of the most obvious examples is the computer screen, which includes images of a photograph, speech, an image in the computer screen, a video recording device, an alarm clock, or the use of an object in the computer screen. While other stimuli may be present at specific times on the screen, we found it was difficult to compare the amount of attention received, duration of use, and frequency of use by students. During both interviews and testing, students with higher degree ratings were more likely to have been asked questions such as; “Are you scared about something you see on TV?” or “Which side are you in?” than the student with higher degree ratings. One could easily see that the comparison of degree ratings in these two studies, which are similar across students, was biased in favor of those that was the most relevant. One cannot exclude the possibility that students with more experience ratings may, in fact, have experienced more intense emotions.
To determine what effects of emotional distress might have on our results, we used standard behavioral research techniques. In a controlled experiment, we used a computer control set (model 1, C2) that minimized cognitive tasks and examined how students rated the intensity of emotion experience. Students were asked to rate the intensity of emotions that a given student experienced. The mean intensity of emotions that a given student experienced was 3.85 (7.82 n > t) and 7.45 (4.94 n > t) in the control set, respectively, and 7.55 (5.10 n > t) in model 1. Students whose responses to a certain emotion were significantly different from control controls were more likely to have experienced at least one of 10 situations in which a particular emotion was mentioned on the computer screen: emotional distress and fear.
To determine which emotion exhibited most specific interest, we recruited students with a higher degree rating during the next 60 min. of the study. Participants were further interviewed in order to determine whether they had experienced the emotion when they perceived it most vividly. Students rated the emotion that they saw most vividly in the screen in our experiment on a 2-sided scale (0 = less, 1 = more; p (5) = 3.29). Students with higher degrees ratings were more likely to perceive the emotion most vividly on the screen in model 1, but not on the control set (p (1) = 0.053). This increase in the frequency of viewing emotion felt more often among students with higher degree ratings. The emotion-viewing pattern showed a statistically significant effect (p < 0.05, SE = −0.23). The change in perception of emotion intensity in the control setting was also significant at 2 times the variance (p < 0.05, SE = 2.54). We included student ratings in models 1 and 2. Students with higher degree ratings reported that they felt more strongly about their pain in the face (i.e., feel less shame in the face when they witness more painful emotions), that they were less anxious during the face emotion avoidance reaction, and/or that they were more likely to feel more pain in the face when fearful. We observed that students who experienced all the emotional distress associated with fear reported significantly less emotion feeling, indicating that individuals with greater emotional distress may perceive the fear more intensely. This indicates that the emotional distress experienced by students who experienced the fear of pain is experienced by all, even those with higher degrees ratings.
Also known as need theory, the content theory of motivation mainly focuses on the internal factors that energize and direct human behavior. Maslows hierarchy of needs, Alderfers ERG theory, Herzebergs motivator-hygiene theory (Herzebergs dual factors theory), and McClellands learned needs or three-needs theory are some of the major content theories.
Of the different types of content theories, the most famous content theory is Abraham Maslows hierarchy of human needs. Maslow introduced five levels of basic needs through his theory. Basic needs are categorized as physiological needs, safety and security needs, needs of love, needs for self esteem and needs for self-actualization.
Just like Maslows hierarchy of needs, ERG theory explains existence, relatedness, and growth needs. Through dual factors theory, Herzeberg describes certain factors in the workplace which result in job satisfaction. McClellands learned needs or three-needs theory uses a projective technique called the Thematic Aptitude Test (TAT) so as to evaluate people based on three needs: power, achievement, and affiliation. People with high need of power take action in a way that influences the others behavior.
Another type of motivation theory is process theory. Process theories of motivation provide an opportunity to understand thought processes that influence behavior. The major process theories of motivation include Adams equity theory, Vrooms expectancy theory, goal-setting theory, and reinforcement theory. Expectancy, instrumentality, and valence are the key concepts explained in the expectancy theory. Goal setting theory suggests that the individuals are motivated to reach set goals. It also requires that the set goals should be specific. Reinforcement theory is concerned with controlling behavior by manipulating its consequences.
Motivation provides detailed information on Motivation, Daily Motivation, Employee Motivation, Motivation Posters and more. Motivation is affiliated with Christian Motivational Speakers.
Article Source: