Improving an Athlete’s Performance Through Intrinsic Motivational Strategies
Introduction
Motivation is the foundation of action. Without understanding the idea that intention drives all actions, we have no base off of which to build an understanding of human behavior. Before making any conscious movement or decision, a person must first have intention. The root of that intention is where motivation comes into play. It can be categorized in one of two ways. Intrinsic motivation is the drive to do something purely for the sake of enjoyment of the task (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Extrinsic motivation is the allowance of external factors, rewards or punishments, to facilitate our choices (Deci et al., 2001).
The ideas set forth by previous researchers in the field of performance psychology tend to serve as a solid foundation to which all succeeding research is based upon. The core concepts utilized in many current sport and performance psychology studies are Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation, Focus/Orientation, and Goal Setting. Each of these broad psychological core concepts can be reshaped to the situation they are placed in, or to what sub-discipline of psychology they are being defined under. Under the guise of Sport and Performance Psychology, these concepts are used to help athletes reach higher levels, push non-exercisers to start some form of physical activity, or improve a person’s psychological health through physical activity.
Sports Psychology
Psychology is the science of understanding human behavior. Put simply, sport and performance psychology is the science of understanding human behavior in an athletic or fitness scenario. The American Psychological Association recognizes sport and performance psychology as being a separate entity in the greater field of psychology. It focuses on the optimization of sport performance, improvement of mental health and well-being of athletes, and motivations behind sport and fitness participation. Various proficiencies of sport psychology are similar to specializations stemming from psychology. The field researches techniques for training, counselling, and skill-development. The topic of motivation can fit well within each of these specialties; a sports psychologist in a consultation position might be tasked with training coaches, individual athletes, or teams in motivational strategies. A sports psychology counselor might talk with an athlete client and try to understand their underlying motivation for sport participation. Sports psychology in the realm of skill-development might be centered around motivation and mastery of a skill (American Psychological Association, 2016).
Motivation
Motivation in its truest sense is the why; why do people do what they do? Perhaps that is a larger question than can be discussed at length to a loop of baseless answers; such is the nature of psychology and philosophy. Motivation cannot fully explain why people act in certain ways, but it can put labels on the driving factors in people’s decisions; and in the realm of sport psychology, that commission becomes a little simpler by limiting the options for motivators to research.
“Motivation concerns energy, direction, persistence, and equifinality – all aspects of activation and intention (Ryan & Deci, 2000).” It is at the heart of a regulatory systems, both social and biological in type. People are driven to act for a number of reasons, either for the simple enjoyment of performing an action, or for a variety of external motives. Any person in a leadership should have an absorbing interest in this topic, productivity is an end result of motivation.
Perhaps the most crucial determinants of people’s behavior, and influential motivators are needs. Originally proposed by Maslow (1943), needs can be defined as a person’s goals, motivators, desires, any elements that lead someone to decide upon a behavior or action. There are several ways of looking at how to define a need. Being considered a true need would require that satisfaction of that motive would result in improvements in health or well-being; anything else would simply be considered a desire (Baard, Deci, & Ryan, 2004). This is a critical distinction because desires could hold potential detriments to health or well-being, perceiving a desire in this light would not make a whole lot of sense.
Major Background Topics
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation
Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation are the general descriptors of what it is that drives a person to act. Boiled down to the bare bones, intrinsic motivation is the desire of an individual to act based purely on enjoyment of the activity. Extrinsic motivation is a broad range of factors that influence a person in performing an action.
It is challenging to split the definitions of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from Self-Determination Theory, which will be explained in full further on in the paper; that theory has been the basis for most succeeding research in the field of sport and performance motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Deci, 2001).
Intrinsic motivation is understood to be the path of seeking out challenges, being exploratory in one’s interests and furthering learning, being an active participant in an activity, being curious; all with the “absence of specific rewards” (Ryan & Deci, 2000). More often than not, intrinsic motivation requires support; it has the potential to be halted by non-supportive conditions. Intrinsically motivated individuals have more confidence and interest in their chosen activity, this leads to greater self-esteem, well-being, and more positive signs in biological markers.
Another theory that works to explain results from motivation research is the Cognitive Evaluation Theory; it originates from Self-Determination Theory, and uses the same terminology (Deci, 2001). Both theories focus on the impact of external events and factors on intrinsic motivation, and how they might influence behavior or personality. A simple illustration of that facet would be the practice of punishment or reward. People who are controlled externally have the tendency to reveal their motivations through their actions and behaviors (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Cognitive Evaluation Theory posits that external events have a negative impact on self-determination and feelings of competence (Deci, 2001).
Self-Determination Theory
Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is a macro-theory that seeks to explain a person’s motivations, how much of their motivation is self-regulated, and the impact on motivation by a person’s psychological needs (Ryan & Deci, 2000). The core concepts outlined in SDT are firstly, a spectrum of motivation; the tail end of this spectrum represents the absence of motivation, the center covers external motivators, and the last section is comprised of intrinsic motivation, or completely self-regulated behavior. Secondly, this theory postulates the necessity of three psychological needs in “facilitating optimal functioning of the natural propensities for growth and integration (Ryan & Deci, 2000).” These are the needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness.
This theory forms more clear distinctions of the terms intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. The aforementioned spectrum of Self-Determination Theory is comprised of the following categories: amotivation; extrinsic motivation, which is further divided into external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation, and integrated regulation; and intrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). While extrinsic motivation is broadly regarded as having motivation gathered externally, there are such a wide array of factors that could influence motivation that specificity was deemed essential.
Although Self-Determination Theory focuses on the motivations of individuals and their development of positive traits, environments surrounding development are critical to creating a holistic image of motivation. The purpose of SDT research is to understand the nature of intrinsic motivation and the impact psychological needs have on people’s well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Generally speaking, intrinsically motivated individuals see more positive outcomes with regard to their motivation and task completing processes.
One primary feature of the Self-Determination Theory is the set of psychological needs necessary for optimal human development. The need for competence is understood to be, in the context of social motivation, a person’s belief in their own skill for a task, or potential for successful completion (Deci & Ryan, 1985). The need for relatedness is concerned with an individual’s connection with others, understanding their useful contribution, and allowing a sense of respect for others (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). The last psychological need is the need for autonomy. It can be explained as a person’s need to be set apart from others with the ability to carry out their own decision making. There is much research on the use of autonomy support, the impact it has on motivation and development, and the distinction of this topic compared to similar topics in the field (Chirkov et al., 2003; Gagne, 2003; Ryan & Bargmann, 2003).
One final point stemming off of Self-Determination Theory, is the hierarchy of motivation, or the level of motivation. This idea hypothesized by Vallerand (1997) takes the concepts and terms from Self-Determination Theory and goes a step in a different direction. The core principle of the hierarchy is: at what level is a person being motivated either intrinsically or extrinsically (Vallerand, 1997). The levels are Global, a person’s general motivation or disposition; Contextual, a person’s motivation within a certain context or activity; and Situational, what motivates a person in a specific moment. This theory is important because it specifies at what level it might be most appropriate to implement a motivational intervention with an individual (Vallerand, 1997).
Achievement-Goal Theory
Achievement Goal Theory refers to the focal point of an athlete’s motivation, in the realm of sport, be it task/mastery, or ego/performance (Nicholls 1984; Dweck 1986). Task, or mastery, focus is when an athlete, performs an activity or their sport with the purpose of bettering themselves; focusing on the Ego or the performance would be caring only for the end result, or how the competing individual “stacks up” to everyone else (Nicholls 1984; Dweck 1986).
In comparing research assumptions on the ideas of task and ego, there are distinctions that must be highlighted in terms of specificities of orientation and involvement of task and ego (Standage et al., 2002). The difference can be conceptualized under the scope of Vallerand’s (1997) hierarchal model of motivation. The child’s achievement-goal orientation would be more of their global or higher-level contextual motivation; their involvement would be seen as their situational motivation, which is one of the variables under speculation in this study. Task orientation focuses on the self, success is measured against the previous self. Ego orientation focuses on comparisons with other people. The interesting concept that is reviewed is that these divisions are not mutually exclusive, an individual can be high or low in either facet at any given time (Standage et al., 2002). The study referenced for this information by Standage et al. (2002) did research with middle school children during physical education classes, hypothesizing the relationship between achievement-goal profiles with situational motivation. Part of this study included placing children into categories determined by their end results: they included a spectrum of combined classifications of low to high in both ego and task orientations.
The key division to comprehend with Achievement-Goal Theory in the context of sport and performance psychology, is the relationship with motivation. As opposed to being an entirely separate entity, Achievement-Goal Theory is a derivative of motivation, specifically in how it matches with intrinsic motivation with task-orientation and extrinsic motivation with ego-orientation (Smith, Balaguer, & Duda, 2006; Ommundsen et al., 2005; Wang et al., 2002).
Motivational Climate
Motivational climate simplified is the perceived social environment surrounding an event, in the context of sport and performance psychology, an athletic event. This concept can be best understood under the guise of Achievement-Goal theory; the two pertinent formed climates would be a task-orientation climate, and an ego-orientation climate (Ommundsen et al., 2005).
There is much to be stated for the necessity for a positive motivational climate. Although the term is not always referenced as being a considered factor or variable in sports psychology research studies, this variation of the social environment coordinates the motivation of athletes. The environment in a team sports setting is often understood as the tone or attitude put forth by coaches, parents, and even fans.
Arguments
Supporting psychological needs, as defined by Self-Determination Theory, in order to improve intrinsic motivation and quality of athletic performance
The fundamental core psychological need in Self-Determination Theory is the need for autonomy. This can be understood as the feeling of having complete control over actions and behaviors; when a person perceives willingness and endorsement (Chirkov et al., 2003). Autonomy falls under the general category of any term relating to the self or individualization; the true value of autonomy is often misunderstood however. As expanded upon by Chirkov et al. (2003), the distinction between autonomy and independence is quite important; as it defines the entire construct of autonomy support. While autonomy may seem to be opposite of dependence, this relationship falls apart evidenced in numerous studies promoting the benefits of autonomy and dependence (Assor, Roth, & Deci, 2004; Adie et al., 2012; Banack et al., 2011).
A fundamental component of needs satisfaction is the support of an athlete’s requirement for autonomy. Autonomous behavior would generally be considered as being completely within the individual. As previously stated, autonomy and dependence can coexist, and actually function together succinctly, as evidenced through research done by Chirkov et al. (2003). Mageau and Vallerand (2003) put forth autonomy support as being the circumstance when the person in the assumed leadership position takes into account the perspectives and desires of their pupil. Within the context of sport and performance psychology, this would the inclusion of decision-making regarding training methods from the athlete, as well as some other leadership roles, in the case of a team scenario. Crucial to this point is the necessity of the coach or trainer limiting the influence of an overload of external motivators (Mageau and Vallerand, 2003).
In highlighting the specificities of autonomy-support as a construct under the broader spectrum of Self-Determination Theory, the differentiation of intrinsic motivation and internal regulation should be further speculated upon. Assor, Roth, & Deci (2004) dive into the subcategories of internal and external regulation; their paper builds the necessary divide between internal regulation and internal motivation. Not that the ideas are too far apart; actually in contrast, they are extraordinarily similar, which is why they require a closer inspection for the categorization of motivation.
The subcategory of introjected regulation from extrinsic motivation of Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), is technically under the primary control of the individual. The task and behaviors are carried out willingly by a person with the notion that self-esteem will only be rewarded with the satisfaction of social acceptance in success (Assor, Roth, & Deci, 2004). While still under the heading of extrinsic motivation, identified regulation and integrated regulation hold more internal importance. Both are autonomous in nature, people acting under these regulations are likely to perceive a sense that the behaviors were their choice; this is quintessentially autonomous.
The satisfaction of autonomy does not necessarily result from a fully intrinsic motivational mindset; it can be internally regulated. This would stipulate that behaviors could stem from an extrinsic foundation but would be ultimately conducive of individual core values and beliefs. Although originating from an external source, the value someone places on the performance of an action can determine their perception of their behavior, be it positive or negative.
The benefits of autonomy support have been validated across a number of studies and fields. Through determining success via academic achievement, physical and mental well-being, prosocial behavior, and of paramount importance for this thesis question, sport performance (Gagne et al., 2003; Gagne & Bargmann, 2003; Adie et al., 2012; Banack et al., 2011).
As effectuous to the intrinsic motivation of an athlete as autonomy support, is the perception that athlete has of the behaviors and actions of potentially supporting individuals, such as parents or coaches. In research comparing the perceptions of children or athletes of a single controlling entity’s autonomy support to intrinsic motivation and well-being, it is commonly seen that there are positive behavioral, social, and biological changes (Assor, Roth, & Deci, 2004; Gagne, 2003; Adie, 2012).
Assor, Roth, and Deci (2004) wrote a paper wherein parents using conditional regard leading to introjected regulation. The paper covers two studies. In the first study, conditional regard and parental strategies were reported across three generations of females in a family line. Women who reported having perceived their mothers of using conditional regard to promote academic achievement tended to have a more controlling parental style with their own daughters. This pattern culminates in the youngest generation of females having negative perspectives regarding parental strategies through the intergenerational transmission of conditional regard.
In a study reporting on college students’ perceptions of autonomy relating to their own feelings of autonomy, individuals who identified as having an autonomy orientation, overall need satisfaction was strongly was strongly positively correlated. This trend was also seen with the relationship of need satisfaction and the role of parental autonomy support in prosocial behavior (Gagne, 2003).
In the situation of the combination of motivational sources, coaches and parents, parents often leave an athlete perceiving more pressure from the parent rather than the coach. This balance of perceived autonomy support was proposed in a paper by Gagne et al., (2003). They studied gymnasts’ perceptions of autonomy support coming from their coaches and parents. Daily motivation was shown to be a predictor of pre-practice well-being. Perceived parental and coach autonomy support was positively related to internal regulation as well as intrinsic motivation. Correlations between initial and daily reports revealed that situational motivation was somewhat related to contextual motivation. Parental involvement had a positive relationship with autonomous and controlled forms of motivation. Coach involvement was negatively related to amotivation. The concluding thought was that through the results it became apparent that athletes perceived their parents as greater sources of pressure (Gagne et al., 2003).
A contesting source of motivation to parents, and potentially autonomy support, are coaches. They tend to be a closer source of motivation and or pressure for athletes over parents (Gagne et al., 2003). In a similar fashion to parental motivation, perceived autonomy support from coaches has a positive impact on mental health and the general well-being of athletes (Reinboth et al., 2004; Adie et al., 2008; Banack et al., 2011; Adie et al. 2012).
This result of coach autonomy support appears in a variety of sports or situations, covering variables such as age, gender, and skill level. The connections drawn also vary slightly, but remain within the area of mental health and well-being and need satisfaction, as coined by Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
Adie et al. (2012) came to this positive conclusion through their study of the relationship of perceived coach autonomy support in elite young soccer players to need satisfaction and well-being. Higher feelings of perceived coach autonomy support were related to increased feelings of positive emotional and physical well being. High perceived coach autonomy support positively predicted both within-person and between person autonomy perceptions. The take home messages from this study are that autonomy support promotes long term growth in all three fields of need satisfaction and that perception of positive coach autonomy support conveyed the feeling of trust of the coach in the players (Adie et al., 2012).
In another study of young athletes’ perceptions of their coaches’ support, Reinboth et al. (2004) were concerned with how the major theories of motivation through the social environment would lead to need satisfaction and physical and mental well-being. Their major finding regarding autonomy support was athletes who perceived the coach as being autonomy supportive reported that being positively related to their feelings of autonomy. This would pose the thought that autonomy support is a predictor of need satisfaction in athletes.
Switching gears for different settings, the role of autonomy support in adult sport participants appears to have similar results as that with young athletes, factoring out perceived controlling behaviors of parents. Coach autonomy is able to be a predictor of all three Self-Determination needs. This would lead to greater engagement in the sport as well as vitality while engaged (Adie et al., 2008). A study linking perceived coach autonomy support and need satisfaction and well-being in adult sport participants by Adie et al. (2008) drew such conclusions. Participants who identified as being lower in autonomy felt more exhausted in participation of their sport, both physically and mentally. These results would lead one to tie back in with young athletes, how their psychological needs may not be so different.
Further altering variables to highlight the importance of Self-Determination need satisfaction, autonomy and competence have been shown to have a necessary place in adolescent and adult sport performance training; and in a study by Banack et al. (2011), in elite Paralympic athletes. In their research autonomy support gave rise to and predicted intrinsic motivation; the higher degrees of coach autonomy support were also positively related with increased need satisfaction of autonomy and relatedness. The most interesting finding was that need satisfaction of competence was the best predictor of intrinsic motivation (Banack et al. 2011). This could be perhaps due in part to the athletes being at the Olympic level of athletics.
Another variable to consider is the age of the athlete. It appears that there is little difference in the need for autonomy support from a coach between adults and adolescents (Gagne, 2003; Banack et al. 2011; Adie et al., 2008). In a second study by Gagne (2003) changes were made to a previous study on college students, to account for possible limitations. An important change that was made was the addition of experimenter observation of prosocial behaviors to determine autonomy orientation. This along with self-reported perceptions of autonomy gave a more well-rounded view of the emotional state of the participant. Because the participants in the second study were adults, the role of parent autonomy support is less impactful than seen with younger participants like those in the first study. Alternate sources of autonomy support were assessed for these individuals. Autonomy support was positively related with need satisfaction but not with psychological engagement, or enjoyment in the activities (Gagne, 2003).
Coaches for adult participants have a significant impact on need satisfaction in adult sport participants. This is evidenced from the results of a study by Adie et al. (2008). They dove into perceived coach autonomy support in adult sport participants and its link to well-being
Coach autonomy support was found to be a predictor of all three Self-Determination needs. This led to greater engagement in the sport as well as vitality while engaged. Participants who identified as being lower in autonomy felt more exhausted in participation of their sport, both physically and mentally (Adie et al., 2008).
In more than one context, athletes who perceived the coach as being autonomy supportive reported that being positively related to their feelings of autonomy (Reinboth et al., 2004). This would pose the thought that coach autonomy support is a predictor of need satisfaction in athletes. Reinboth et al. (2004) took a comprehensive look at multiple theories for motivation through the social environment and determined how they might predict need satisfaction and physical and mental well-being. Not only with coaches, but parents have a crucial role to play in their children’s perceived autonomy and thus their performance as well (Assor, Roth, & Deci, 2004; Gagne, 2003; Gagne et al., 2003).
Creating a task-oriented motivational climate in order to boost motor skill learning; maintaining a healthy balance with ego-orientation
Achievement-Goal Theory gives another impression on the facilitation on motor skill learning in sport and sport performance, within the field of sport and performance psychology. The major themes of task and ego orientation focus on both the individual and environment which they are performing in (Nicholls 1984). Due to its intrinsic nature, task orientation promotes skill development much more than ego orientation, which is an attitude wherein the individual places more value on competition with others. Neither achievement goal profile is better than the other, depending on the scenario, both have potential to shine above one another. Research has shown to put task orientation in the more important slot, but the most elite athletes’ achievement goal profiles have a balance of both task and ego (Cumming et al., 2001; Smith et al., 2006; Biddle et al., 2003).
In a study by Cumming et al. (2001) Swimmers reported on task and ego orientation and sport imagery. Multivariate analyses of variance were used to determine groups based on orientation profile. Participants were able to be distributed into three different groups based upon their reported levels of task and ego orientation; moderate task/high ego, high task/low ego, and low task/high ego. The group of swimmers who identified as being moderate in task and high in ego orientation were prone to imaging themselves in a place of success. The group with high task orientation but low ego focused their imagery more on mastery of skills with little regard to final outcome. The group low in task orientation and high in ego was driven solely by performance and was less prone to successful imagery. From this the researchers were able to postulate that the ideal achievement goal orientation would be high in both task and ego, although this orientation profile was not observed in any of the athletes (Cumming et al.)
More than just determining an athlete’s path towards intrinsic motivation or self-determination, achievement goal profiles can help to predict and ensure relationships and confidence for an athlete. The profile of an athlete can determine how they perceive their physical and social environment. Smith et al. (2006) studied how well athletes’ achievement goal orientation profile acted as a predictor of their perceptions on their motivational climate, peer relationships, and fulfillment or enjoyment in their sport. Those reporting being lower in task orientation exhibit less adaptive responses. Athletes reporting being low in ego orientation and high in task orientation have a coupled report of perceiving their environment as being a task oriented motivational climate. These athletes tend to have more positive outlooks on their coaches and teams. They also maintained more enjoyment for playing soccer. The goal profiling would speculate that ego orientation is not detrimental to intrinsic motivation so long as it is tacked onto a greater task orientation. when the profile is swapped the other way around, athletes respond as being lower in enjoyment of their sport, and have less positive relationships with their coaches and teammates.
More than just determining motivation, there are a number of performance-related outcomes that can be measured from assessments of athletes’ achievement-goal profiles. These are important in training a well-rounded successful athlete. In a large-scale meta-analysis done by Stuart et al. (2003), task and ego orientations were found to have had significant impacts on a number of factors leading to the success or failure of athletic performance. Task-orientation, being more intrinsic in nature, was found to be related with athletes’ feelings that success was derived from hard-work; ego-orientation was related with athletes’ belief that external social factors played a more significant role than the self (Stuart et al., 2003). Another component of sport was observed, that ego-oriented athletes tended to have more negative attitudes on and off the field as well as poor sportspersonship and regard for the rules. A well-rounded image of an athlete, more than just their perspective on the motivational climate, brings in necessary information for building mental training programs.
Using a mixture of both Self-Determination and Achievement-Goal Theory
The concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation viewed through the lens of these theories reveal similarities between the two. Those links are highlighted through a number of current research studies implementing motivational strategies on various demographics. In a study of motivational climate of the physical education of secondary school children in England, a relationship was revealed between a mastery-oriented motivational climate (achievement-goal theory) and autonomy support (self-determination theory) (Standage et al., 2003). Standage et al. (2003), worked to create a linear model determining the formation of individual motivation from the input of social factors and psychological factors to the motivation type and eventual consequence.
Social facilitation holds an important role in all but intrinsic motivation; this is shown in both Self-determination theory with the included “need for relatedness,” and in achievement-goal theory with the benefits seen in limiting intra-team competition with the minimizing of ego-orientation (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Nicholls 1984; Dweck 1986). In the background of the study by Standage et al. (2003), they outline the importance of the creation of a positive environment, either autonomy-supportive or mastery-oriented, to promote physical education and activity. While some studies stress the importance of motivational climate being formed by coaches or teachers (Standage et al., 2003; Amorose & Horn, 2001) in supporting intrinsic motivation and mastery in their players, Assor, Roth, & Deci (2004) analyze the role of parents in their children’s motivation.
Along with another study by Spray et al. (2006), there is a common theme that appears in recent performance psychology studies; that is the idea of an autonomous motivational climate versus a controlled environment. In the context of parental control, Assor, Roth, & Deci (2004) completed two studies; first how mothers had an impact on feelings of autonomy in their daughter’s education environment; the second study accounted for multiple variables and metrics in the assessment of perceptions of autonomy and internal regulation. In the first study, it was determined that mothers who had been raised in a more controlling environment were likely to do the same with their daughters, despite the actions being regarded as negative by both parties (Assor, Roth, & Deci, 2004). In their second study, Assor, Roth, & Deci (2004) tested a number of hypotheses regarding parental control, students’ feelings towards their parents and more specifically how their parents’ actions and attitudes affected their lives in different categories. Using Self-Determination Theory, Assor, Roth, & Deci (2004) were able to determine that generally the behaviors reported on by the students fell under the category of extrinsic motivation, spread out between the separate sub-categories (external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation, and integrated regulation) (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
The research conducted by Spray et. al (2006) creates an excellent example of how well Self-Determination Theory and Achievement Goal Theory work well synergistically. Understanding that individuals will vary in terms of task or ego orientation (Nicholls, 1984), this study measures how either group exists under different circumstantial stimuli, controlling or autonomy-supporting (Spray et al., 2006). The participants were young novice golfers; the goal of the study was to determine if individuals, regardless of goal-orientation, would respond more positively to an autonomy supporting environment, resulting in intrinsic motivation. Not surprisingly this was shown to be the case, and is backed up by previous research (Deci et al., 1994). The interaction between Self-determination Theory and Achievement-Goal Theory was not as prominent as was hypothesized; that being said, the connection can be seen. As shown by Spray et. al (2006), task-oriented individuals placed in a perceived autonomous situation will perform better and more willingly than if they are placed in a perceived controlling, or over-bearing, situation. Almost equally so, high ego-oriented individuals in mirrored circumstances show the same results (Spray et al., 2006). From this it is possible to speculate that a motivational climate shift towards satisfying autonomy is more likely to have an impact on an individual’s intrinsic motivation, therefore showing that the application of Self-Determination Theory has more of an impact than the application of Achievement-Goal Theory.
In a study of motivational climate, teaching strategies, and physical education classes, Morgan et al. (2005) tested a variety of teaching styles and how well students responded to them in their physical education classes. The classes were taught by graduate education students who themselves were instructed in the various teaching styles they would use. The main styles used were command/practice, reciprocal, and guided discovery. Command/practice is much more instructor-centered; it is the primary teaching style seen in most educational facilities. Unfortunately, the teacher-centered method promotes very little, if any, task/mastery orientation. Both reciprocal and guided discovery classes, which have much more opportunity for student leadership involvement, promoted mastery-orientation and intrinsic motivation. Although not stated directly, the guided discovery method shares qualities of being a Self-Determination Theory approach for supporting autonomy (Morgan et al., 2005)
Perceptions of the motivational climate can either lead to a positive relationship with intrinsic or extrinsic motivation; though either one may be more motivational depending on the goal profile of the individual. While extrinsic motivation may be taking on somewhat of a negative connotation, it is not necessarily a hindrance to intrinsic motivation. As seen in Achievement-Goal theory, task-orientation and ego-orientation are not mutually exclusive; depending on the situation, they can coexist in an efficient showing of motivation (Standage et al., 2003).
Some extrinsic factors that motivate athletes to compete would be the drive to better themselves to win over others, maintain scholarships, make their parents/coaches proud, or even because they feel it is a worthwhile activity to grow themselves as a person for the future. Kavussanu et al. (1996) put together a study of perceived motivational climate and goal orientation profiles. The study covered a series of beginner-level tennis classes comprised of men and women, the classes focused sometimes on mastery orientation and sometimes on goal orientation, intrinsic motivators and extrinsic motivators. As hypothesized, and in line with previous research, when the motivational climate was perceived as being more mastery oriented, intrinsic motivation and enjoyment for the sport and practice were both increased. Interestingly, when the perceptions of the motivational climate were compared with self-efficacy, belief in oneself to succeed, males showed no significant difference between task/mastery climate and ego/goal climate. Men were more confident in their abilities regardless of external factors whereas women required more external affirmation of their abilities under the goal-driven circumstances (Kavussanu et al., 1996).
Conclusions
Mental training, or motivation training, for sport does not stray far from other performance methodologies, with regard to following the current trend of individualization. To take the conclusion down to the bare bones level, an answer to the problem of how to initiate or maintain intrinsic motivation in an athlete surrounded by extrinsic motivators would be multi-faceted. Firstly, through Achievement-Goal Theory, it would be necessary to create an individual motivation profile of the athlete, determine what drives them. This process can be seen in a multitude of studies (Cumming et al., 2002; Smith et al., 2006; Standage & Treasure, 2006; Stuart et al. 2003).
Once the solid base of the athlete’s motivations is formed, an individualized program can be developed for them. Basing the mental training program off of either Self-Determination Theory or Achievement-Goal Theory, a wide array of heavily researched methods could be utilized, combined or standing alone, to meet the specific needs of the athlete. Through Self-Determination Theory, research has shown that more often than not, an increase in support of an athlete’s autonomy, acting for themselves, has positive outcomes in terms of intrinsic motivation (Adie et al., 2008; Adie et al., 2012; Banack et al., 2011; Gagne, 2003).
Taking the approach through Achievement-Goal Theory is interesting; it is more direct with the application of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Every person is different, they may react differently to certain methods of motivation; while some may work well with a task driven environment or training others may benefit greatly when there is more competition or goal driven training (Stuart et al., 2003). Research has shown that while task-orientation is the biggest driving factor for building intrinsic motivation, the addition of ego-orientation takes the motivation of the athlete to even greater heights (Standage et al., 2002).
The final concept to bring about proper intervention or training for an athlete revolves around Vallerand’s (1997) hierarchal model of self-determination theory. From an applied psychology standpoint, the most impactful way to improve upon motivation is from the smallest to the largest level. Seeking to correct an athlete’s motivation on the situational level, is not only the quickest and easiest solution, but it can have more effect on the higher levels of motivation than one would think. If the improvement is only attempted once, there would be no long-term change; but given enough time for a motivational intervention to take root, an athlete would be able to see greater motivation at the contextual level, and eventually the global level (Vallerand, 1997).
Bringing an athlete to have a maintained high level of intrinsic motivation is no small task, the world of sports and athletics is highly extrinsic; there is an exponential growth of those external motivators as the level of competition increases. Through individualized motivation strategies, athletes could learn to center their daily practice around what they truly wish to gain from participating in their sport. Intrinsic motivation is crucial to an athlete seeking enjoyable, and successful participation in their sport.
R. Andrew Paxton, B.S., M.S. Kinesiology
Head Coach & Trainer, Coeur Ninja
e: robertpaxton11@gmail.com
p: (615) 424-3239
References
Adie, J. W., Duda, J. L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2008). Autonomy support, basic need satisfaction, and the optimal functioning of adult male and female sport participants: A test of basic needs theory. Motivation and Emotion, 32, 189-199.
Adie, J. W., Duda, J. L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2012). Perceived coach-autonomy support, basic need satisfaction and the well- and ill-being of elite youth soccer players: A longitudinal investigation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13(1), 51-59.
Amorose, A. J., & Horn, T. S. (2001). Pre- to Post-Season Changes in the Intrinsic Motivation of First Year College Athletes: Relationships with Coaching Behavior and Scholarship Status. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13(4), 355-373.
Assor, A., Roth, G., & Deci, E. L. (2004). The Emotional Costs of Parents' Conditional Regard: A Self-Determination Theory Analysis. Journal of Personality, 72(1), 47-88.
Baard, P. P., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Intrinsic Need Satisfaction: A Motivational Basis of Performance and Weil-Being in Two Work Settings1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(10), 2045-2068.
Banack, H. R., Sabiston, C. M., & Bloom, G. A. (2011). Coach Autonomy Support, Basic Need Satisfaction, and Intrinsic Motivation of Paralympic Athletes. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82(4), 722-730.
Biddle, S., Soos, I., & Chatzisarantis, N. (1999). Predicting Physical Activity Intentions Using Goal Perspectives and Self-Determination Theory Approaches. European Psychologist, 4(2), 83-89.
Chirkov, V., Ryan, R. M., Kim, Y., & Kaplan, U. (2003). Differentiating autonomy from individualism and independence: A self-determination theory perspective on internalization of cultural orientations and well-being. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 84(1), 97-109.
Cumming, J., Hall, C., Harwood, C., & Gammage, K. (2002). Motivational orientations and imagery use: A goal profiling analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20, 127 – 136.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (2001). Extrinsic Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation in Education: Reconsidered Once Again. Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 1-27.
Gagne, M. (2003). The role of autonomy support and autonomy orientation in prosocial behavior engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 27(3), 199-233
Gagné, M., Ryan, R. M., & Bargmann, K. (2003). Autonomy support and need satisfaction in the motivation and well-being of gymnasts. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 15, 372-390.
Hall, H. K., Kerr, A. W., Kozub, S. A., & Finnie, S. B. (2007). Motivational antecedents of obligatory exercise: The influence of achievement goals and multidimensional perfectionism. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8(3), 297-316.
Kavussanu, M. Roberts, G. C. (1996). Motivation in physical activity contexts: The relationship of perceived motivational climate to intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 18, 264-280
Mageau, G. A., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). The coach-athlete relationship: A motivational model. Journal of Sport Sciences, 21, 883-904.
Morgan, K. Kingston, K. Sproule, J. (2005). Effects of different teaching styles on the teacher behaviours that influence motivational climate and pupil's motivation in physical education. European Physical Education Review, 1(3), 257-285.
Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328 – 346.
Ommundsen, Y., Roberts, G. C., Lemyre, P., & Miller, B. W. (2005). Peer relationships in adolescent competitive soccer: Associations to perceived motivational climate, achievement goals and perfectionism. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(9), 977-989.
Reinboth, M., & Duda, J. L. (2004). The motivational climate, perceived ability, and athletes’ psychological and physical well-being. The Sport Psychologist, 18, 237-251.
Reinboth, M., & Duda, J. L. (2006). Perceived motivational climate, need satisfaction and indices of well-being in team sports: A longitudinal perspective. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7, 269-286.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
Smith, A. L., Balaguer, I., & Duda, J. L. (2006). Goal orientation profile differences on perceived motivational climate, perceived peer relationships, and motivation-related responses of youth athletes. Journal of Sports Sciences, 24(12), 1315-1327.
Standage, M., & Treasure, D. C. (2002). Relationship among achievement goal orientations and multidimensional situational motivation in physical education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(1), 87-103.
Standage, M., Duda, J. L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2003). A model of contextual motivation in physical education: Using constructs from self-determination and achievement goal theories to predict physical activity intentions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 97-110.
Spray, C. M., Wang, C. K., Biddle, S. J., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. (2006). Understanding motivation in sport: An experimental test of achievement goal and self determination theories. European Journal of Sport Science, 6(1), 43-51.
Stornes, T., & Ommundsen, Y. (2004). Achievement goals, motivational climate and sportspersonship: A study of young handball players. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 48(2), 205-221.
Stuart, J. H. Biddle, C. K. Wang, J. Kavussanu, M. Spray, C. M. (2003). Correlates of achievement goal orientations in physical activity: A systematic review of research. European Journal of Sport Science, 3(5), 1-20.
Tauer, J. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2004). The Effects of Cooperation and Competition on Intrinsic Motivation and Performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(6), 849-861.
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 29, pp. 271-360). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Wang, C. K. J., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., Spray, C. M., & Biddle, S. J. H. (2002). Achievement goal profiles in school physical education: Differences in self-determination, sport ability beliefs, and physical activity. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 433 – 445.
Comments
Post a Comment