Contentious issues

How evidence refutes motivational misconceptions

Conceptualizations of motivation are easily misunderstood because many of our beliefs concerning motivation are highly personalized and frequently formed through daily experience, resulting in learned patterns of behavior. Lacking evidentiary support, individual experience may lead to false conclusions and erroneous generalizations concerning the causes of behavior and the interrelations among motivational variables. This chapter introduces some of the more contentious issues endemic to motivational science, focusing on the distinction between beliefs and knowledge. Other interpretive ambiguities are discussed with the intention of providing clarity as to what inferences can or cannot be determined through the examination of motivation evidence. The chapter concludes with an overview of two popular motivation frameworks and describes specific approaches that promote and sustain optimal motivation in the self and others.

Keywords

Science misconceptions; beliefs; research methods flow; optimal motivation

Chapter outline

As an impressionable child reared in New York City during the 1960s, I was affectionately known in the neighborhood as “BM.” Scatological connotations aside, my childhood moniker “big mouth” developed from a penchant to share my naive worldly views with anyone who would listen. For years, I truly believed, and regularly tried to convince my friends, that deliberately crossing your eyes would result in a permanent facial deformity. I held strong convictions about my esotropic belief, based upon repeatedly hearing this same proclamation almost daily from my stern-eyed mother. Little did I realize at the time that her fabricated science was merely a maternal manipulation, designed to quell my cross-eyed reactions to her repetitive requests. Like most children, I made little, if any, distinction between what was true and what I believed.

The influence of individual belief convictions is not endemic to loquacious toddlers. Many seemingly well-balanced, educated, and productive adults embrace beliefs supported only by conjecture and speculation. According to a 2005 poll of Americans, 61% believed in the existence of a physical hell, 24% reported that extraterrestrials have visited Earth, and 37% believed that houses can be haunted (www.gallup.com, Gallup, 2005). In a similar survey, participants reported experiencing at least one of the following: personally communicating with the dead (29%), visiting a fortuneteller or psychic (15%), and endorsing reincarnation (24%) (Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, 2009). If you doubt these statistics represent the views of highly intelligent and educated people, think again. The frequency of future educators possessing pseudo-scientific beliefs in such topics as the Loch Ness Monster and Big Foot closely parallels that found in the general adult population. These proportions apply even to those individuals indicating an interest in teaching science, including a majority who reported that teaching evolution without discussing divine intervention was patently “false” (Losh & Nzekwe, 2010).

Principle #6—Motivational beliefs differ from motivational knowledge

The probability of ghosts or extraterrestrials appearing in your living room, classroom, or office is slim (except in Area 51, of course). However, it is highly likely you will encounter individuals with a variety of esoteric beliefs about learning and performance (tastefully referred to as “misconceptions” by psychologists). Motivational beliefs are defined as a set of propositions that are accepted as true by an individual, regardless of evidentiary support, and that influence the direction and intensity of effort toward a target. Examples of motivational beliefs include, but are not limited to, the assessment of your own intelligence; challenge you perceive in a specific task; degree of interest you have toward a topic; personal estimates of task value, utility, and importance; and presumed likelihood of successfully completing a task. Individual belief frameworks also consider how we are perceived by others and what criteria others use to assess and value our accomplishments.

The influence of beliefs on motivated behavior is pervasive, especially for teachers. Research affirms that teacher beliefs filter what information is taught to students, how knowledge is framed during a classroom discussion, and which teaching strategies are used by the instructor (Fives & Buehl, 2012). Pragmatically, teacher beliefs determine the goals teachers set for their learners, the effort and perseverance they invest in teaching, and the extent of cognitive engagement with subject matter (Bandura, 1997). Perhaps the most salient aspect of personal beliefs is the resistance to belief change (Vosniadou, 2001), even in the face of disconfirming scientific evidence (Dole & Sinatra, 1998).

Misconceptions develop as a result of learned experiences or observations, when few negative consequences are associated with holding a specific belief (Hynd & Guzzetti, 1993). Misconceptions about motivation become especially murky when the influence of personal emotion supersedes objectivity and individuals embrace ideas despite the availability of clear disconfirming evidence, resulting in what Shermer (2012) called false beliefs. Susceptible individuals fall into the emotional trap of wanting to advance convictions based on fact but, instead, rely on strong emotional connections to their championed cause. In the most egregious of circumstances, false beliefs turn into false enlightenment (Phillips & Burbules, 2000). In these situations, individuals become so fervently entwined with their skewed interpretations of reality that they begin to consciously and deliberately assert to others the apparent veracity of their contentions.

The annals of history are replete with examples of self-righteous beliefs. Consider Erik the Red sailing 1600 miles from Norway to a barren wasteland and naming it Greenland, or the miscalculating King George III of England who thought taxing the tea of American colonists would imbue loyalty to the mother country. Support of highly partisan beliefs continue to the present day, as evidenced by the unwavering patronage or utter contempt held by some Americans concerning the Affordable Care Act that overhauled the US health care system. Depending upon whom you ask, the law provided needed health coverage to over 7,000,000 previously uninsured Americans or raised the health insurance premiums by 18% to 81%, depending upon the age demographic (www.forbes.com, Forbes, 2013).

Misconceptions are a realistic source of contention for the motivational detective (MD) because the false enlightenment can be so pervasive that it results in accepted paradigms within the seemingly unbiased scientific community. French psychologists and early twentieth century thought-leaders Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon, creators of the first intelligence tests, were vocal proponents of scientific inquiry and gathering empirical evidence to make informed decisions. In their seminal work “Mentally Defective Children” they asserted, “Psychologists are studying the value of evidence, and are thinking out better methods of arriving at truth, in order to discover reforms which may be introduced into the organization of justice” (Binet & Simon, 1914, p. 2). The same pair proceeded to reach the preposterous conclusion that developmentally delayed children could be categorized into two main classes: “feeble-minded” and “ill balanced.” Their categorization scheme was based primarily upon behavioral observations, which led them to the appalling conclusion that “the more likeable the child is represented to be, the greater the amount of retardation one may safely attribute to him” (p. 20). Considering the longstanding influence of renowned scientists, such as Binet and Simon (for a marvelous exposition of belief misconceptions and their influence on human history see the classic work “Mismeasure of Man” by Steven J. Gould), it becomes prudent for MDs to distinguish between their own self-serving, socially constructed subjective views and the primary goal of science, which is to objectively pursue knowledge verification through scientific evidence (Shermer, 2002).

The distinction between truth and beliefs is, indeed, a slippery slope. Four frequently encountered scenarios will illustrate my point. Scenario one dictates that you have a...