(2 of 5 in series)
Ryan & Deci's (2000) Self-Determination Theory Continuum of motivation moves from an impersonal orientation and amotivation, through a controlled orientation and extrinsic motivation, to an autonomous orientation and intrinsic motivation. This is the second installment of the series on motivation. If you missed the introduction run back and read A Motivation Continuum to get caught up!
What is amotivation?
Amotivation is the lowest category on the SDT continuum and represents individuals who have unmet psychological needs and an impersonal causality orientation. Amotivation simply means a lack of motivation, or lacking an intention to act (Deci & Ryan, 2000). A person in this category is not behaving in an intentional way. Some amotivated individuals may appear disinterested or defeated by the tasks at hand; there is no sense of ownership in their actions. In order to understand why a person may be feeling unmotivated, we can turn to the causality orientations.
Impersonal Orientation
As you may remember from the introduction to SDT, there are 3 basic psychological needs which play a crucial role in self-determined motivation and well-being. They are: competence, autonomy, and relatedness. In order for an individual to be self-determined these three basic psychological needs must be fully met. In the Impersonal Orientation none of these needs are being met, which leads one to experience social contexts as uncontrollable (Deci & Ryan, 1985). When a person perceives that they have no control over the things that happen (an external locus of control for those familiar with psychological terminology), there is no motivation to act.
What's missing in amotivation?
Amotivation may look like: not valuing an activity (Ryan, 1995), not feeling competent to do it (Deci, 1975), or not believing it will yield a desired outcome (Seligman, 1975).
For some individuals experiencing amotivation, they are not having their need for competence met. Competence is an individuals ability to complete a task successfully, thereby controlling the outcome of effort (White, 1959). Feeling incompetent is something I believe we all can relate to; it's not a good feeling, and I can absolutely understand how it drives motivation away.
If incompetence is not immediately resonating as the culprit of amotivation, perhaps the lack of relatedness is more readily apparent. Relatedness is connection and caring for others (Deci, 1971). We are often described in psychology and sociology as "social beings" because we derive meaning and value from interactions with others (Fiske, 2018). If a task or an environment is not conducive to human connection, amotivation is a logical result. Isolation, when it is not temporary or intentionally created, is an incredibly challenging space to exist. Connection to others can naturally result in encouragement, accountability, or stimulation in a way that isolation simply cannot.
Lastly, amotivation for many could seem to be a product of rigid, unnecessary, or mandated expectations that stifle autonomy. Autonomy is the opportunity for an individual to control one’s own decisions and behaviors (Deci, 1971). If you can recall a task with no or low autonomy, it is likely that the task was either extremely simple and often redundant, or an external force was mandating the process for completing the task. In both scenarios, I can immediately feel the fibers of my motivation say "NOPE." Tasks and environments with no autonomy deprive individuals of that basic psychological need to control one's own decisions and behaviors resulting in amotivation.
Conclusion
Amotivation is something that we all experience from time to time. In those moments, one or more of our basic psychological needs is not being met. But when all three needs are unmet you experience the world as uncontrollable, and amotivation is not fleeting. In the next post I will explore the first two categories of extrinsic motivation and a control orientation.
Thanks for reading!
References
Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 105–115.
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
Fiske, S. T. (2018). Social beings: Core motives in social psychology. John Wiley & Sons.
Ryan, R. M. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes. Journal of Personality, 63, 397–427.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 54-67.
Seligman, M. (1975). Helplessness: On depression, development, and death. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
White, R. W. (1959). "Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence". Psychological Review. 66(5), 297–333.
Comments