The Overjustification Effect:
Understanding the Motivational Paradox
In the field of psychology, the Overjustification Effect is a phenomenon that refers to the unexpected decrease in intrinsic motivation when external rewards are introduced for engaging in a previously enjoyable activity. It highlights the complex interplay between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and challenges the traditional belief that rewards always enhance motivation. Understanding this effect can have wide-ranging implications, not only for individuals seeking to motivate themselves or others, but also for educators, employers, and anyone interested in optimizing human performance. In this comprehensive article, we will delve into the intricacies of the Overjustification Effect, its underlying mechanisms, relevant research findings, and practical applications.
Before we explore the Overjustification Effect, it’s crucial to understand the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation refers to engaging in an activity for the sheer pleasure and satisfaction it brings, whereas extrinsic motivation involves engaging in an activity to attain some external goal or reward. Intrinsic motivation is driven internal factors such as curiosity, interest, or a desire for personal growth, while extrinsic motivation relies on external factors like tangible rewards, recognition, or avoidance of punishment.
The Overjustification Effect arises when external rewards or incentives undermine intrinsic motivation. According to the theory, when people engage in an activity they naturally find enjoyable, the introduction of an external reward can shift their focus from the inherent enjoyment of the activity to the extrinsic reward itself. Consequently, this shift in focus diminishes the individual’s intrinsic motivation, leading to a decrease in their engagement and interest in the previously enjoyable task. This effect is particularly pronounced when the reward is perceived as controlling or if it provides information about the individual’s competency or ability.
One of the classic studies that illustrates the Overjustification Effect was conducted Mark Lepper, David Greene, and Richard Nisbett in 1973. In their research, they observed preschool children who initially enjoyed drawing with markers. The experimenters divided the children into three groups:
the first group received no reward, the second group was promised a reward for drawing, and the third group was unexpectedly given a reward for their drawings. Surprisingly, they found that the third group, who received the unexpected reward, exhibited a decrease in their intrinsic motivation to draw compared to the other two groups. This finding raised the critical question of why external rewards can sometimes have unintended negative consequences on intrinsic motivation.
To understand the underlying mechanisms of the Overjustification Effect, several theories have been proposed. One prominent explanation focuses on the shift in perceived locus of causality. In the absence of external rewards, individuals typically attribute their engagement in an activity to internal factors, such as personal interest or enjoyment. However, when rewards are introduced, people may attribute their engagement to the external reward rather than their inherent interest, thus reducing the perceived autonomy to engage in the activity. This shift in perceived control undermines the sense of autonomy and can diminish intrinsic motivation.
Another theory that sheds light on the Overjustification Effect is cognitive evaluation theory. According to this theory, the introduction of an external reward serves as an informational cue that reflects how competent or capable an individual is perceived to be. If the reward is seen as an indication of external evaluation or judgment, it can undermine intrinsic motivation. On the other hand, if the reward is viewed as informational feedback that enhances feelings of competence, it may not impede intrinsic motivation. Thus, the perceived informational value of the reward plays a crucial role in determining its impact on motivation.
The Overjustification Effect has been extensively studied in various domains, including education, sports, and the workplace. In educational settings, for instance, teachers often face the dilemma of using rewards, such as stickers or tokens, to motivate students. While these rewards may initially enhance performance, they can paradoxically lead to a decrease in intrinsic motivation over time. Research has found that students who are rewarded for engaging in activities that they initially found intrinsically enjoyable subsequently display reduced interest and engagement in the absence of rewards. This effect can hinder long-term learning and create a dependence on external incentives.
Similarly, the Overjustification Effect has important implications for employers and managers seeking to motivate their employees. Offering monetary rewards or bonuses for tasks that employees naturally enjoy can inadvertently diminish their intrinsic motivation. This effect is particularly relevant in creative industries, where employees are driven a deep passion for their work. Introducing external rewards can disrupt the individuals’ intrinsic motivation, stifle creativity, and decrease overall performance. Consequently, organizations need to strike a delicate balance between providing appropriate external incentives and cultivating intrinsic motivation to foster sustained engagement and productivity.
To mitigate the impact of the Overjustification Effect and promote intrinsic motivation, several strategies have been suggested. One approach is to focus on task-contingent evaluation rather than outcome-contingent rewards. Instead of rewarding individuals for completing a specific task or achieving a particular outcome, it is more beneficial to emphasize the value of the effort, improvement, or mastery demonstrated during the activity. This approach ensures that individuals still feel a sense of autonomy, competence, and intrinsic satisfaction.
Another effective strategy is to provide meaningful feedback and positive reinforcement. Instead of relying solely on external rewards, feedback that emphasizes personal growth, competence, and autonomy can enhance intrinsic motivation. Recognizing and acknowledging an individual’s intrinsic motivation can empower them to continue engaging in the activity for its inherent value, rather than relying solely on extrinsic rewards.
Additionally, it is crucial to foster an environment that promotes intrinsic motivation supporting autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Offering individuals choices, opportunities for self-direction, and a sense of ownership over their work can enhance feelings of autonomy. Providing opportunities for skill development, feedback, and mastery experiences can boost intrinsic motivation promoting a sense of competence. Finally, cultivating positive relationships, teamwork, and a sense of belonging can fulfill the need for relatedness, further enhancing intrinsic motivation.
The Overjustification Effect highlights the intricate relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and warns against the potential pitfalls of relying on external rewards. When external rewards are introduced for engaging in an activity that was naturally enjoyable, individuals may experience a decline in their intrinsic motivation. This effect occurs due to a shift in perceived locus of causality and the informational value of the reward. Understanding the Overjustification Effect has numerous implications for educators, employers, and individuals seeking to optimize motivation and performance. By focusing on task-contingent evaluation, providing meaningful feedback, and creating an environment that supports autonomy, competence, and relatedness, it is possible to mitigate the negative impact of external rewards and foster sustained intrinsic motivation.