Search

This chapter reframes, from a developmental, self-worth perspective, the longstanding debate over the presumed negative impact of extrinsic rewards on subject-matter appreciation and creative expression. The chapter argues that the debate over the potentially adverse effects of extrinsic payoffs is largely misplaced because of a narrow, almost exclusive focus on the tangible attributes of rewards as the cause of their adverse effect. The proper concern in the debate on the effects of rewards should be more with their meaning as a measure of self-definition rather than their tangible attributes and with their withdrawal as a means of control rather than the offering of rewards. To promote a developmental perspective to the question, the chapter uses data from Berkeley college students' recollections of forces influencing their willingness to learn for its own sake throughout their education. These data showed that students' personal interest and curiosity in learning increased incrementally from elementary to high school, with a slight dip in middle school, and dropped precipitously after college entry. The possibility that competition for scarce valued rewards is the major cause of intrinsic disengagement is discussed, drawing on findings from the Berkeley student study and other research. Possible contributors to task engagement were identified as task success, personal meaning of the task, and task-focused reasons for engagement rather than self-aggrandizement or self-protection. The chapter concludes by asserting that when properly employed by educators, tangible reinforcers can encourage adolescents' intrinsically-oriented goals. (Contains 41 references.) (KB)

Self-worth-related consequences of success and failure for low and high performers under cooperative and competitive reward structure were compared in 282 middle school students solving puzzles. Results illustrate that, regardless of reward structure, success and failure play a critical role in reducing the impact of individual performance differences. (SLD)

This rejoinder to Brown and Weiner (TM 509 074) attempts to resolve areas of apparent conflict and to offer a broad synthesis around the self-worth theory of achievement motivation. The different yet compatible aspects of attribution and self-worth theories in regards to achievement effort are discussed. (BS)

Do success-oriented and failure-avoidant students differ in their performance because of differential attributions? Path analysis, which permits the evaluation of causal assumptions in well-specified theories, was employed to test the adequacy of the causal linkages in the attributional model of achievement behavior. Thus, although differences in attributions exist, they are not causally important. (Author)

Recent research on classroom achievement dynamics suggests a conflict of teacher/student values regarding effort expenditure. Student effort is clearly rewarded and the indifferences punished by teachers. From the student perspective, expending effort when risking failure is a potential threat because high effort/failure invites ascriptions to low ability. The effect of effort stability on teacher and student reactions to failure was investigated to determine if students with a history of persistent effort evaluated differently in failure from students who were characterized by erratic bursts of energy and periods of indifference to study, and to examine, from the student perspective, if a reputation for erratic study patterns acted to reduce shame by deflecting the causes of failure away from low ability. College students made ability inferences and rated affective reactions to hypothetical series of test failures along two dimensions: amount of overall effort and stability of effort. Other subjects, in the role of teachers, administered punishment to hypothetical students under the same conditions. Results confirmed self-worth predictions and strengthened the case for the existence of a conflict of teacher/student values. Within any level of effort (either high or low), one effort pattern was preferred by students and another by teachers. (Author)

Under a mastery learning system students can take successive parallel tests with study interspersed between tests until they demonstrate a minimal level of competency. For most students, such procedures increase final performance, yet some may experience repeated subjective failure. Self-worth theory predicts that repeated failure in the face of prolonged effort expenditure forces students to acknowledge their inability. The negative consequences of repeated subjective failure were examined with 80 undergraduates enrolled in a modified mastery structure psychology course who perceived their test performances as a series of failures. Questionnaires accompanying the tests assessed causal ascriptions, expectations for future success and affective reactions. As failures accumulated, attributions to inability not only increased but also became more salient in determining variations in shame and expectancy. Low self-concept students were particularly subject to this negative dynamic because they already harbored self-doubts. (Author)