Question

Research findings have led to the postulate of three innate psychological needs—competence, autonomy, and relatedness—which, when satisfied, yield enhanced self-motivation and mental health and which, when thwarted, lead to diminished motivation and well-being. Do you the postulate to be valid? Why or why not? How would accepting or rejecting the postulate influence real-world motivational strategies? Explain.

Answer 1

Note: This response is in UK English, please paste the response to MS Word and you should be able to spot discrepancies easily. You may elaborate the answer based on personal views or your classwork if necessary.

(Answer) Motivation is an entirely subjective notion. For different personalities, motivation can be derived from varied sources. For certain individuals, ambition and position would work as a motivator. However, there might be people who are not as ambitious to achieve a high position. In certain cases, love and emotional connections work as better motivators than others.

Competence with one’s tasks might work as a good confidence booster. For instance, an accountant might be good at their job, which would give them the confidence to handle a project. However, this might not motivate them to want to be a CEO, because of their lack of interest in climbing up the professional ladder.

Autonomy can be expressed in the way one conducts them self. This means that an individual would have the freedom to express themselves in a way that they desire. However, this tangent might not be related to how motivated an individual might feel. For instance, the same accountant would be free to apply for a better position or a promotion at their workplace. Being motivated to do so would be a different emotion from being free to apply for the position.

Relatedness might help individuals with a feeling of affinity in the society. This again would depend on what makes them feel the sense of relatedness. The accountant in the above example has two groups of friends at work. Group A, shares a relatedness with the accountant in terms of their love for art. Group B shares a relatedness in terms of their dislike towards an upcoming project. None of these affinities work as motivators for the accountant to apply for a promotion. Furthermore, Group A might not necessarily influence the accountant to buy a painting and Group B does not influence the accountant to quit the project. This is probably because relatedness might help bring about affinity and help the accountant feel relatable to the groups but not necessarily be motivated to take any further steps.

Psychologists Edward Deci and Richard Ryan postulated that competence, autonomy and relatedness work as motivators. However, these are broad elements that may be motivators and just as easily be placid elements or even “de-motivators.”

Motivation is something that needs to be constantly reinforced. Just like nutrition would need a regular intake of food, motivation would need to be constantly supplied until the goal is achieved. These motivators may vary depending on what elements caused the individual to lose their motivation. For instance, if John is not in the mood to study on Tuesday because his favourite film is on TV, he might be motivated to study if he was told the film was repeated the next day. Similarly, if John did not want to study on a Friday because of his early weekend holiday plans, he might be motivated to study if his parents delayed the plans by a few hours.

This is why motivation can be drawn from different causes and emotions and not by a fixed recipe of competence, autonomy and relatedness.