User:Serenejuan/sandbox

Overjustification Effect
The term overjustification effect, developed by Lepper, Green and Nisbett (1973) refers to the phenomena in which the presentation of an external reward to an individual for an activity that he finds inherently interesting will over time, undermine one’s motivation to engage in the activity (as cited in Boggiano & Ruble, 1979).

Decades of research have attempted to distinguish the different categories of motivation that people experience, based on the diverse reasons or goals that give rise to any activity. The most basic distinction as observed and documented by researchers is between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation involves being motivated to perform an activity in order to attain a particular outcome (Ryan & Deci, 2000). For instance, a child might complete his mathematics homework because his parents have promised him a new skateboard if he obtains full mark for it. The cause of this activity is clearly external. The child is said to be extrinsically motivated because his actions are dependent on the administered extrinsic rewards in order to achieve a separable outcome of receiving the skateboard

On the other hand, intrinsic motivation involves being encouraged to perform an act for it is inherently interesting or rewarding, and not because of the instrumental value – unlike extrinsic motivation (Ryan et al, 2000). For instance, a child thoroughly does his mathematics homework because he particular enjoys solving algebraic mathematical equations as they provide him a sense of accomplishment. In this case, the child is said to be intrinsically motivated, for his reasons for doing so are internally generated, such that he deciphers algebraic equations simply because he enjoys doing so.

The OJE occurs when an external incentive undermines the intrinsic motivation of one to perform a task (Ryan et al, 2000). It requires that (1) there be an association between the stimulus (extrinsic reward) and the behavior be established, (2) the stimulus has to be eliminated for OJE to occur, and (3) sufficient time be present for the first two conditions to take place.

Before the effect comes into play, an individual must come to associate receiving external rewards with the target activity that is originally driven by intrinsic motivation. This is called an unconditioned association, and for this association to occur, individuals must have experienced a multitude of episodes to which they have received rewards subsequent to engaging in said target behavior. Extrinsic rewards serve as tangible reinforcements and over time, individuals come to form an association between the target activity and rewards. On the grounds of this interpretation, the perception of rewards encourages the individual to perform the target activity. Over time, his behavior becomes dependent on the tangible rewards, of which eventually serve as a sufficient reason for engaging in the activity. What was once the individual’s intrinsic motivation to perform the activity has now come to be controlled by salient rewards

Experimental evidence
The OJE is evident across various age groups. Lepper, Green & Nisbett (1973) conducted in a study in which they observed preschool children between the ages of 3-5 years old from behind a one-way mirror. The children’s interest in drawing with colored magic markers were recorded before randomly assigning them to either a no reward condition, an expected reward condition or an unexpected reward condition. The children were then asked to do a drawing for a visiting person (the experimenter) and subsequently awarded based on the condition that they have been assigned to. Later, the children were observed again from behind the mirror and their interest in drawing with the markers were measured a second time round. The authors hypothesized that children in the expected reward condition would show less subsequent intrinsic motivation in drawing than children in the unexpected and no reward condition. As predicted, children in the expected reward condition spent less time playing with the drawing materials than children in the other 2 conditions. Deci (1971, 1972a, 1972b) found similar results in tertiary students, who reported lowered amounts of intrinsic motivation for a range of interesting activities after being presented with tangible rewards, while Kruglanski, Friedman, and Zeevi (1971) yielded corroborating evidence that material incentives could undermine the intrinsic motivation of high school learners of an appealing activity (as cited in Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999)

Theories
First developed by Bem (1972), the self-perception theory states that we infer our own attitudes by observing our own behaviors as if from a third party in order to understand the causes of our behavior (Bem, 1972). The self-perception theory has two basic postulates: (1) we develop our own attitudes, beliefs and a range of various internal states by observing our own behavior. For instance, if one finds himself watching many video clips of dance competitions, he can come to the conclusion that he is interested in dance. (2) When our own internal cues are ambiguous, we step into the role of a “third party observer”, and infer our attitudes and beliefs from our behavior based on the context in which the behavior occurs. Following the tenets of the self perception theory, we can postulate that OJE occurs because when an individual participants in activity without the presence of external rewards (reinforcer), he will most likely infer that he holds an interest motivation to engage in the activity and concludes that he engages in the activity because it is inherently fun to do so. However, when he is continuously presented with external rewards after engaging in this intrinsically motivated behavior, he begins to question the reasons for engaging in the activity. Based on the self-perception theory, he would turn to the context of his behavior and examine the environmental forces acting on his behavior. Given the presence of these external reinforcers, he eventually concludes that he is engaging in the activity because of the rewards and not because it is intrinsically enjoyable (Forehand, 2000).

Applications

 * Volunteering

Researchers and philosophers have questioned whether people are truly altruistic or whether they help others in order to receive a reward. Whenever we engage in behaviors that benefit others, it involves a range of costs to the self, such as the loss of precious time, money, effort and even possible embarrassment, yet it may also bring about a range of rewards, such as money, praise, recognition and gratitude. A system of rewards for prosocial behavior can be seen as guaranteed that it will be in the individual's interests to be prosocial (Schwartz, 1993). However, providing people with extrinsic inducements to carry out a prosocial behavior undermines intrinsic motivation and supersedes the reputational value of performing such good deeds (Bénabou & Tirole, 2003 ; Ryan et al, 2000).

Research on the effects of extrinsic rewards on altruism is limited; though Fabes, Fultz, Eisenberg, May-Plumlee, and Christopher (1989) found the presentation of rewards did indeed undermine the subsequent helping behavior of children aged between 6 and 12 years old (as cited in Warneken & Tomasello, 2008). A more recent work was done by Warneken et al (2008), in which tested the effects of extrinsic rewards on the helping behavior of 20-month old infants. Infants were assigned to either a Reward condition (receive a material reward after helping), a praise condition (receive a verbal praise instead of a material reward) or a Neutral condition (no material reward nor verbal praise). The authors found that infants who had received the material reward were less likely to engage in further helping behavior as compared to infants who had received either verbal praise, or no rewards at all.

Conclusions from the findings from the abovementioned studies of overjustification effect on prosocial behavior reveal that when rewards are administered subsequent to a prosocial act, the frequency of the behavior increases – provided the rewards continue to be implemented. When the rewards are eliminated however, the behavior decreases. The basic idea behind this incident is that individuals have now attributed their reasoning and motives for helping to the social rewards “I did it for the reward” When the rewards are not presented in the first place, the helper’s interpretations of their actions revolves around the preexisting state of distress of the individual in need of help, and recognizes that helping is the correct and acceptable thing to do. Benabou et al (2005) suggest that external financial rewards may reduce intrinsic motivation to help, such that financial incentives can elicit a “crowding-out effect” and diminish one’s intrinsic desire to engage in altruistic behaviors. More specifically, they purport that the presence of rewards or punishments “spoils the reputation (or self-reputational) value of good deeds, creating doubt as to the extent to which they were performed for the incentives rather than for themselves.Hence, constant provision of extrinsic inducements debilitates such an intrinsic motivation and produces a perverse effect upon future helping behavior, where people will begin to expect rewards for publicly lending assistance to others, and not out of purely altruistic objectives (Schwartz, 1993)