A PSYCH 144 LITERATURE REVIEW

A PSYCH 144 LITERATURE REVIEW - 1 Industrial/Organizational...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Industrial/Organizational Psychology Literature Review The relationship between rewards (e.g., pay) and work motivation Psychology 144 Section 11 Tuesday, November 27, 2007 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Literature Review Topic:  The relationship between rewards (e.g., pay) and work  motivation. Article 1 :   Work Motivation and the Negative Effects of Extrinsic Rewards Journal:  American Psychologist Author:  William W. Notz (University of Manitoba) Article One When examining factors that affect work motivation many theorists and  psychologists draw an important distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation  (Notz, 1975). The question these theorists try to answer is simple: “Why do people  work?” However, in order to answer this question theorists draw on several factors  including different types of motivation, especially extrinsic motivation and its rewards.  Extrinsic rewards include salary, fringe benefits, and promotions. These are examples of  extrinsic rewards because they provide satisfaction that is independent of the actual  activity itself and because they are under the control of someone other than the employee  (Notz, 1975).  2
Background image of page 2
However, theorists and practitioners alike, according to Notz, draw a distinction  between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation as well as assume that these two kinds of  motivation are independent and, more importantly, additive. Therefore, Notz (1975)  believes that the motivation to perform should be greatest in a situation in which both  intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are aroused. Furthermore, the highest motivation to  perform should occur when the employee has a job that is both interesting and  challenging and where the employee relates the extrinsic reward back to his or her own  performance (Notz, 1975).  Notz notes, however, that other theories have emerged that challenge these  assumptions. These new theories claim that intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are not  independent, do not summate, and that arousing extrinsic motivation may actually reduce  intrinsic motivation.  Notz then explains De Charms’ (1968) two major hypotheses. The first is that the  introduction of extrinsic rewards will decrease intrinsic motivation and the second is that  withdrawal or reduction in extrinsic rewards will increase intrinsic motivation. According  to De Charms, man’s primary motivation is to be effective in producing changes in his  environment and to be the primary locus of causation for his behavior (De Charms,  1968).  Wok done to explore De Charms’s two hypotheses included ten studies relevant  to the first hypothesis and two relevant to the second hypothesis. Deci (1971, 1972a,  3
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 14

A PSYCH 144 LITERATURE REVIEW - 1 Industrial/Organizational...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online