PSY 3109 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: Process Simulation, Reinforcement, Decision-Making
28 Apr 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
November 2, 2017
Goal Setting and Goal Striving
Cognitive Sources of Motivation
There are many cognitive mental events that can energize and direct our actions with a sense of purpose
-Ex. We rely on our cognitions when we make plans, set goals, use mental simulations, etc.
These mental processes are causal determinants of action
-Cognition will be translated into action
Making Plans
People have mental representations of the ideal states of their behaviour, environmental objects, and events
People are aware of the present state of their behaviour, environments, and events
When there is an incongruity between one’s present state and one’s ideal state, people are more likely to formulate a
plan to remove that incongruity
-Incongruity: provides energy
-Plan: provides direction
TOTE model (Miller et al.,1960): illustrates the cognitive mechanism underlying plans
-Involves:
•Test: compare present state with ideal state
-People detect present-ideal inconsistencies
-People generate a plan to eliminate the incongruity - plan provides
direction
•Operate: act on environment to realize ideal state
-People instate plan-regulated behaviour
•Test: compare present state with ideal state
-People monitor the extent of any remaining present-ideal incongruity (feedback)
-If incongruity continues, the individual will revert back to the operate stage
•NB: Test-operate loop can continue for a while
•Exit: present state is in congruity with ideal state
-Strengths: takes into account that plans can be long-term (ideal state can be a future goal)
•Breaks down goals into directing daily activities (ex. Want to learn a new language - breaks it down into learning
basic vocabulary, learning grammar, etc.)
1
TEST
Compare
present state
with ideal
state
OPERATE
Act on
environment to
realize ideal
state
TEST
Compare
present state
with ideal
state
EXIT
Present state is
congruity with
ideal state
If incongruous
If incongruous If co ngruous
November 2, 2017
•Plan will generate action sequences
-Criticisms:
•One of the main issues is that it views plans as fixed, static, and mechanical
-Plans can be modified - human beings are active decision makers who either act to achieve the ideal state or
change and revise an ineffective plan (Carver & Scheier, 1982)
-One’s plan is as likely to undergo change as one’s behaviour
•Incongruity gives rise to corrective motivation - energizes the individual to pursue the most adaptive course
-Perceiving incongruity doesn’t necessarily instigate the TOTE model, it activates the corrective motivation
instead
•Decision making process is activated whereby the individual considers many potential solutions
-Corrective motivation is a balance between deciding to change and being able to make the necessary
changes
Changes activate emotions:
-Negative emotions: activated when progress is slower than expected
-Positive emotions: activated when progress is faster than expected
Discrepancy
Current perspectives view the discrepancy between the present state and the ideal state as having motivational
properties
-Perceived discrepancy is a very strong motivator
-NB: the discrepancy has motivational properties, not the ideal state
•Focusing on the discrepancy will provide more motivation
-Magnitude of the motivation is related to the magnitude of the discrepancy
Two types of discrepancy:
-Discrepancy reduction (feedback system): a discrepancy is detected, creating motivation and we only stop once we
feel like there is no longer a discrepancy
•Related to goal-achieving
•Reactive
-Discrepancy creation (feed-forward system): person is proactive and sets a future goal/ideal state, creating a
discrepancy and creating motivation
•Related to goal-setting and more focused on personal growth
•Proactive
-NB: in both cases, the discrepancy is still the source of the motivation
2
November 2, 2017
Goal Setting
Goals: whatever an individual is striving to accomplish (Locke, 1996)
-Goals generate motivation by focusing people’s attention on the discrepancy between their present level of
accomplishment (i.e. goal-performance discrepancy)
There are numerous empirical evidences that goal setting generally enhanced performance (Locke & Latham, 1990)
-People with goals outperform those without - includes self-created goals and goals set by others
-Ex. Study had elementary school children do sit ups in 2 minutes. Some children were instructed to set a goal
(desired number of sit-ups completed) while others were not
•Children who had set a goal finished more sit-ups than those who did not set a goal
•Presence of a goal energized and directed sit-up performance
•NB: goal-setting group was assigned randomly and these students were not more fit or more healthy
However, the nature of type of goal being a set is a key determinant for the facilitating effect of goals on performance
(see below)
Goal Difficulty, Specificity, and Congruence
Goal difficulty: how hard a goal is to accomplish
-*Energizes and sustains behaviour
-As difficulty increases, performance increases in a linear fashion
•The more difficult the goal, the more it energizes the individual
•People exert effort in proportion to what the goal requires of them - goal-performance discrepancy dictates the
amount of effort required
-Value-expectancy theory (Feather, 1982): effort is based on the value or desirability of the goal
•Effort = (desirability/value of goal) x (person’s assessment of likelihood of attaining the goal)
•We will prioritize goals that are more valuable and are more likely to be attained
•NB: harder goals are more desirable
Goal specificity: how clearly the goal is defined
-How clear is what the person needs to do?
-*Directs behaviour
-Specific goals vs. ambiguous goals: specific goals are more motivating
•Specific goals help provide clear tasks and increases the probability of people performing the desired actions
•NB: converting an ambiguous goal into a specific goal can usually be done by adding numerical concepts
(creating timelines)
3
Document Summary
There are many cognitive mental events that can energize and direct our actions with a sense of purpose. We rely on our cognitions when we make plans, set goals, use mental simulations, etc. These mental processes are causal determinants of action. People have mental representations of the ideal states of their behaviour, environmental objects, and events. People are aware of the present state of their behaviour, environments, and events. When there is an incongruity between one"s present state and one"s ideal state, people are more likely to formulate a plan to remove that incongruity. Tote model (miller et al. ,1960): illustrates the cognitive mechanism underlying plans. Involves: test: compare present state with ideal state. People generate a plan to eliminate the incongruity - plan provides direction: operate: act on environment to realize ideal state. People instate plan-regulated behaviour: test: compare present state with ideal state. People monitor the extent of any remaining present-ideal incongruity (feedback)
