

Intrinsic motivation doesn't exist - bootload
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/inmotiv.htm

======
baguasquirrel
Maybe intrinsic motivations should be defined as those things (e.g. curiosity,
desire for power) that we like just for the sake of them, whereas extrinsic
motivations are things we like because they get us to the intrinsic
motivations. It's quite possible that most people don't really like money just
for the sake of money, and that they just like like stuff that money buys.

There's certainly no denying the experimental evidence that monetary rewards
seem to dampen interest in activities if you give them and then take them
away.

The research behind Self-Determination-Theory would also suggest that most
people probably share a relatively small subset of the motivations that this
guy is talking about.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination_theory>

------
sjones
That article consists of nothing but repeated statements "There is no proof,"
without any reference to numerous studies showing evidence of the
verisimilitude of Intrinsic Motivation.

It's like sticking your fingers in your ear and saying "lalala I can't hear
you."

~~~
gfunk911
Right. I was expecting a link to a study, but this is just some guy's opinion,
which contradicts existing research.

Also, i can't imagine one who has experienced true intrinsic motivation for a
sustained period of time saying that it's not more powerful.

~~~
shrnky
Not just some guy: "Reiss, a professor of psychology at Ohio State University"

------
10ren
Warren Buffett's son described him thus: _He likes to be right. It's just that
when he's right, he makes a lot of money_.

In support of the article, a community is better off if people have (or
develop) different motivations, in accordance with division of labour. Dawkins
would probably damn any genetic basis of this as group selection, but it does
make everyone better off.

I agree that more research is required; but pop-psychology will always prefer
simple explanations (intrinsic good! extrinsic bad!). I do.

Anyone know what his 16 categories are? I think the researcher's title is
link-bait. I bet some of them are (arguably) intrinsic.

~~~
drunkpotato
_Dawkins would probably damn any genetic basis of this as group selection, but
it does make everyone better off._

You contradicted yourself. Dawkins, at least in "The Selfish Gene", is much
more subtle than most people give him credit for (subtlety makes for terrible
sound-bites, like "Dawkins would damn...").

If an individual is part of a community in which there is a diversity of genes
and a division of labor so that every individual in that community is more
likely to reproduce their genes than individuals not in that community, then
for each individual their bundle of genes will thrive. That is straight-up
Dawkins. There is nothing to damn.

------
mparr4
The title of the article is a bit misleading. This guy doesn't seem to be
saying that intrinsic motivation doesn't exist, just that it isn't quite as
simple as an intrinsic/extrinsic dichotomy would make it seem, which seems
fair enough. However, to make the claim that there are 16 basic desires that
motivate people (as this researcher does) is a simplification as well.

Any sort of quantization of the motivating factors in a person's life
obviously cannot completely convey the true reality of the situation whether
the number of factors is 2 or 16. This sort of quantization is certainly
useful in _talking about_ what motivates an individual, but given that it is a
model and not reality itself, it's tough to say that one is more right than
the other (or any other for that matter).

~~~
dhimes
He was skeptical of its existence:

 _“But there is no real evidence that intrinsic motivation even exists.”_

~~~
mparr4
True. The entire article provides a context that somewhat weakens that
statement though--as I read it anyway. I was left with the impression that he
thought it was more of an oversimplification than a fabrication. Though it's
tough to argue against a quote that spells things out as explicitly as you
have!

------
thunk
> _“There is no reason that money can't be an effective motivator, or that
> grades can't motivate students in school,” he said._

Ok, well then what about this [1] video from this [2] submission?

This makes me think about something else entirely: It should be easier to draw
connections between submissions like these. It should be easier to link
repetitive discussions into a cohesive whole. It should be easier to _build
something grand_ from the time we invest in social news communities. As it is,
it often feels like a waste of time. Someone please build this. My time's
spoken for.

[1] <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc>

[2] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1357390>

Edit: It'd be somewhere around the intersection of Stack Overflow, Wikipedia
and HN

------
Isamu
The article does not support the claim with evidence, but argues the point.
For me the most valuable bit was the suggestion at the end, that “Too many
studies that supposedly prove intrinsic motivation have serious flaws in
logic, or too many important uncontrolled variables,” he said. “There needs to
be more scientific rigor.”

------
mojuba
The theory behind why material reward makes you perform worse than usual is:
while thinking on the problem, thoughts about the reward take up some
expensive resources in the brain. Compared to intrinsic rewards, extrinsic
ones are a novelty for the brain, so it can't help but build plans about some
new possible "futures".

------
edw519
_Whether you agree there are 16 desires or not, he said there is not any way
to reduce all of these desires to just two types._

Or just one. Now bear with me, but sometimes I wonder if Freud was right.
There's only one real desire: to get laid.

    
    
      Why are you writing this software?
      Because people need it.
    
      Why can't they just use something else?
      Because mine's better.
    
      Why is yours better?
      Because it handles these 27 things no one else has considered.
    
      Why don't you just share those 27 things with the world?
      Because I want to be the one to do it.
    
      Why do you want to be the one to do it?
      So that I can earn admiration, recognition, and lots of money.
    
      Why do you want admiration, recognition, and money?
      So I can get a date.
    
      Isn't there an easier way to attract women?
      Not for me.

~~~
MisterWebz
Now i know this, i can skip all this work and just try to get laid. You saved
me a lot of work.

On a serious note, are you saying that all people who are ambitious and
motivated to achieve something great in their lives are trying to get laid?

~~~
baguasquirrel
I think some of us have realized (perhaps after the fact) that getting laid is
actually overrated. It's the game that's fun, not actually getting laid.
Furthermore, this game is really #$@*ing shallow and stupid.

Still others have realized that it's not getting laid that matters, it's the
ability to get laid, and to keep it coming. Part of that is having something
material, which (though not strictly necessary) is quite useful for getting
laid.

Once you realize one or both of these points, you pretty much stop caring
about getting laid (i.e. why bother?), and start chasing your dreams again.

This is all probably for the better, in the end, because getting laid (or not)
doesn't seem to correlate as well with having meaningful relationships, and
frankly, I've seen too many bright friends waste their potential by spending
their prime years trying to game members of the opposite sex (emphasis on the
plural).

------
lars512
Reiss is saying: "some people call X the set of motivations which get called
intrinsic, but actually there's no set X which is really shared between
everyone". As an example, children can be motivated by curiosity or by grades
and competition (an "extrinsic" motivator).

I imagine he'd agree that individuals have _primary_ and _secondary_
motivations, where secondary ones are all about filling some combination of
primary ones. He's just saying that the primary ones differ between people
(and maybe between times of day), and thus trying to debunk the idea that some
motivators traditionally thought of as extrinsic (e.g. monetary reward) can
never be primary.

------
BonoboBoner
I never experienced intrinsic motivation, the only thing that works for me is
externally imposed fear.

~~~
stcredzero
Loneliness would probably work too, then. Arguably, this is a form of fear.
It's also arguably external.

------
shrnky
Putting on my tinfoil hat for a second. Wouldn't it benefit huge corporations
to push studies that favor Intrinsic motivation.

Think about the boosts in profit when you don't have to give as many raises. I
mean my god research shows it doesn't make anyone more happy. :)

~~~
metageek
Let's go straight to gold-leaf hat: corporations should fund research into
drugs whose sole effect is to make people feel motivated when they hear the
company loyalty song.

------
mparr4
Here's a question: is there any place for value in science??

The researcher who is the focus of the article doesn't seem to think so. I've
read a few books suggesting that that is exactly what science could use. What
do you think?

------
Towle_
Title: _Intrinsic Motivation Doesn't Exist, Researcher Says._

Researcher: "But there is no real evidence that intrinsic motivation even
exists."

These are different.

------
stcredzero
Does it make sense in the context of evolution? Is there a survival value in
intrinsic motivation? There is survival value in curiosity.

------
known
Was discussed before <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=433866>

------
RyanMcGreal
This flies in the face of the research Dan Pink has been popularizing about
the utility of extrinsic rewards in motivating behaviour.

