Theories of motivation, case study analysis.

Lyle Kirkham
Mar 31, 2015
3 min read

“By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail” Benjamin Franklin

“Even if you fall on your face, you are still moving forward” Victor Kiam

With the 2015 exam season just around the corner, i thought i’d write about topics which might come up in those exams, one of those topics is… Motivation, this is a highly sort after/ researched area within sport psychology so therefore there are lots of theories relating to improving motivation within sporting contexts.

What is motivation?

Motivation according to Sage (1977) “Direction, intensity of one’s effort”, so if we practically apply this definition to a sporting issue, more recently New Zealand in the cricket world cup their motivation is measured by effort towards achieving a common/ team goal, which in this case would be... winning the world cup. Also within motivation there are two important terms to consider, they are both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation is a term used to describe someone who’s motivation is centred around individual competence for example, “i want to” mentality, in comparison extrinsic motivation is quite the opposite, this is used to describe someone with a motivation centred around rewards and punishment, verty external and a “have to” mentality. So which one do you think is better for sports performance?

Now the fundamentals of motivation have been explained (briefly), lets consider different theories of motivation, but firstly lets set the scene with a case study as this makes it easier to apply the theories.

Case study- (one from the exam), key points from context. Andy 15 year old tennis player,

wins= enjoyment, i played well and max effort in training

loss= upset, i played bad and loss of effort in training sometimes doesn’t turn up.

Level of opponent no issue, response the same.

So lets get theoretical… From the key points explained its quite obvious that Andy has a extrinsic type of motivation, loves the success but hates losing i suppose like everyone really but its his reaction to losing that is interesting, when he loses he exerts minimal effort in training or doesnt even show up this shows to me a very “i have to” type of motivation.

Within the area of sport psychology there is a theory called cognitive evalaution theory (cet) which is applicable to this case study, in particular the undermiming effect. This relates to how Andy percieves the upcoming game, both in terms of level of opponent and required level of skill and luck. In the case of the undermiming effect Andy percieves his level of opponent to be high, this correlated with his current losing streak causes Andy to doubt himself and adopt a "i win need to be very lucky to win the next game" mentality, this has a major decrement on his intrinsic motivation this in turn results in minimal effort exerted and missed training sessions.

As well as cet, Andy also show clear signs of having an ego-orientated attitude towards tennis, this means that Andy participates in tennis for his own appraisal and to boost his ego and self esteem, there he compares himself to others and becomes discouraged in the face of failure, this type of attitude is associated with decreased intrinsic motivation, low self efficacy, high anxity and learned helplessness also of note which is especially evident in Andy's case, withdrawal from activity.

In 1985-86 Weiner presented a model called Attribution theory this can be used in this present case study to explain how Andy defines his success and failure and to what characteristics Andy attributes his success or failure. In Andy's case...

Success = "I played great"

Loss = " I played bad"

The Attribution theory presents 3 main basic Attribution traits.

Stability- stable or unstable

Locus of causality- internal or external

Locus of control- in control or out of control

In relation to Andy's case, i would suggested he shows unstable, external and out of control characteristics from what we know about which is very little given that. Unstable because his mood fluctuates depending on the outcome or result, external based on his motivation orientation (ego) and finally out of control because if he is playing high level opponent he attributes the likelyhood of success down to acts of luck from than sheer ability.

The final theory is the need achievement theory by Atkinson (1974), to put it briefly Atkinson identified 5 attributes which lead to either increased motivation and performance or the opposite.

They are:

Personality

Situational

Resultant tendency

Emotional reaction

Achievement behaviour

These 5 traits are best explained in a table, provided below: