Title |
Multiple types of motives don't multiply the motivation of West Point cadets
|
---|---|
Published in |
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, June 2014
|
DOI | 10.1073/pnas.1405298111 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Amy Wrzesniewski, Barry Schwartz, Xiangyu Cong, Michael Kane, Audrey Omar, Thomas Kolditz |
Abstract |
Although people often assume that multiple motives for doing something will be more powerful and effective than a single motive, research suggests that different types of motives for the same action sometimes compete. More specifically, research suggests that instrumental motives, which are extrinsic to the activities at hand, can weaken internal motives, which are intrinsic to the activities at hand. We tested whether holding both instrumental and internal motives yields negative outcomes in a field context in which various motives occur naturally and long-term educational and career outcomes are at stake. We assessed the impact of the motives of over 10,000 West Point cadets over the period of a decade on whether they would become commissioned officers, extend their officer service beyond the minimum required period, and be selected for early career promotions. For each outcome, motivation internal to military service itself predicted positive outcomes; a relationship that was negatively affected when instrumental motives were also in evidence. These results suggest that holding multiple motives damages persistence and performance in educational and occupational contexts over long periods of time. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Japan | 197 | 28% |
United States | 32 | 4% |
Australia | 5 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 4 | <1% |
Canada | 4 | <1% |
Norway | 3 | <1% |
Poland | 3 | <1% |
Mexico | 3 | <1% |
Germany | 3 | <1% |
Other | 26 | 4% |
Unknown | 436 | 61% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 691 | 97% |
Scientists | 21 | 3% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | <1% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 10 | 4% |
Germany | 2 | <1% |
Japan | 2 | <1% |
Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
South Africa | 1 | <1% |
Russia | 1 | <1% |
Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Luxembourg | 1 | <1% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 247 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 41 | 15% |
Student > Master | 37 | 14% |
Researcher | 36 | 13% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 25 | 9% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 24 | 9% |
Other | 61 | 23% |
Unknown | 43 | 16% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Psychology | 55 | 21% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 35 | 13% |
Social Sciences | 34 | 13% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 6% |
Arts and Humanities | 11 | 4% |
Other | 62 | 23% |
Unknown | 55 | 21% |