Overjustification Effect: What It Is And What It Shows About Motivation
The overjustification effect is a phenomenon of the psychology of motivation , studied and introduced by researchers Lepper, Greene and Nisbett. According to this phenomenon, our intrinsic motivation to do a certain activity decreases when we are offered a reward for it.
In this article we take a tour of human motivation and explain what this effect consists of. In addition, we will see in detail how the experiment that made it known was developed and the results that emerged that demonstrated such an effect.
Before explaining what the overjustification effect consists of, we are going to address the concept of motivation, and explain its two major subtypes: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. All of this, because they are concepts inherent to this phenomenon that we are going to talk about.
What is motivation? Some authors define it as “the dynamic root of behavior.” But… what exactly does it mean?
Etymologically, The term “motivation” derives from the Latin “motivus” or “motus”, which means “cause of movement”. Thus, motivation underlies all types of behavior that people manifest, one could say that it is its “cause” or driving force, and it has to do with the desire we have to do a certain action or task, in order to satisfy a need. , or to get something we want.
Broadly speaking, there are two types of human motivation: intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. Let’s see, in summary, what each of them consists of:
1. Intrinsic motivation
Intrinsic motivation is that motivation that is given inherently to the task That is, the task itself motivates us, we like it, and this motivation has nothing to do with external reinforcers or rewards.
Simply put, we enjoy performing a certain action (for example doing homework). This is intrinsic motivation, a very important motivation especially in the educational field, where the ideal is for the child to learn for the mere pleasure of learning.
Extrinsic motivation, on the other hand, is “outside” the task ; It is the motivation towards the prize or reward that we obtain when completing a certain task. That is, we perform certain actions to get something from the outside, such as praise, money, a prize…
Overjustification effect: what is it?
The overjustification effect is a phenomenon framed within psychology (even more specifically, basic psychology, which encompasses the psychology of motivation), which occurs when an external stimulus (for example a reward, a prize… that makes up the extrinsic motivation) reduces the intrinsic motivation that someone has to perform a certain task.
To quickly illustrate the overjustification effect, let’s take an example: a child really likes to read (that is, he has a great intrinsic motivation for reading), and he reads for the pleasure of reading itself.
Suddenly, his father tells him that every time he finishes a book, he will give him €5 as a prize, so he can spend it on whatever he wants. This can cause the child’s intrinsic motivation to read to decrease, because his motivation to read is influenced by his motivation to get the €5 (external reward).
That is, you will no longer only read for the pleasure of reading, but also to obtain its reward. This is the overjustification effect, which can appear in both children and adults.
The experiment
Who discovered (And how) the overjustification effect? Researchers Lepper, Greene and Nisbett, through a field experiment developed with children in a kindergarten.
The investigation of the overjustification effect is based on the following hypothesis: “when we associate a certain activity with an external reward (extrinsic motivation), we will have less interest in carrying out said activity (intrinsic motivation) if in the future, such reward does not exist.”
Lepper, Greene and Nisbett’s experiment took place in a kindergarten. There They observed that children had a certain interest in carrying out different educational activities.
In their overjustification effect experiment, the researchers had children (who were between 3 and 5 years old) draw and play with markers. Specifically, they were placed in three different experimental conditions, which were:
1.1. Condition 1 (expected reward)
The first condition was “expected reward.” It consisted of promise children that they would receive a “good player” ribbon for simply participating in the activity of drawing with markers.
It is important to note at this point that the children, prior to the experiment, were already carrying out this activity, spontaneously, for the simple fact that they enjoyed doing it (intrinsic motivation).
1.2. Condition 2 (unexpected reward)
The second condition in the experiment was “unexpected reward.” Here, children were not initially told that they would receive a reward for doing the activity (they were not told anything). After, At the end of the activity, they were given the prize.
1.3. Condition 3 (no reward)
In the third and final condition, called “no reward,” The children were simply not told about prizes and rewards at any time. That is, in this condition, children were not given rewards for completing the drawing activity; It was the control group.
2. Methodology: second phase of the experiment
After the application of these conditions, and at the end of the first phase of the experiment, the researchers They observed the children in a free environment, where they could play whatever they wanted without premises or restrictions.
The objective of this second phase of the experiment on the overjustification effect was to determine whether or not there were more children who played the drawing activity, this time without the promise of receiving a final reward for it.
3. Results
What results did Lepper, Greene, and Nisbett’s experiment provide on the overjustification effect? We are going to know each one of them, according to the experimental condition applied and in relation to the overjustification effect.
First of all, it was observed that The children subjected to the first experimental condition (expected reward) played much less drawing with markers in the second phase of the experiment (free play).
If we apply the theory of the overjustification effect to this result, we can think that the children had decreased or even lost their original intrinsic motivation for the activity, by having a reward (extrinsic motivation) for doing it (in the previous phase of the experiment).
We must keep in mind that they had never had this reward, and that suddenly someone “rewarded them for playing.”
3.2. Unexpected reward condition
Another result of the experiment showed how the children in the second experimental condition (unexpected reward), They had not changed their interest in drawing, and they drew the same in the free play phase.
Thus, it was attributed that the children enjoyed drawing prior to the experiment, in the same way that they also enjoyed the activity in the experimental condition (since they did not know that they would have a reward), and in the same way that they played in the experimental condition. second phase of the experiment (free play).
3.3. No reward condition
Finally, the children in the third experimental condition (without reward) also showed no changes in their drawing behaviors or in their interest in the activity. That is, they drew the same in the free play stage.
Following the overjustification effect, since they had never had a reward for doing so (in the first phase of the experiment), His intrinsic motivation had remained “intact.”.
