Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intrinsic motivation doesn't exist

researchnews.osu.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 34 posts

Re: Intrinsic motivation doesn't exist

#11

Post by lars512 »

Reiss is saying: "some people call X the set of motivations which get called intrinsic, but actually there's no set X which is really shared between everyone". As an example, children can be motivated by curiosity or by grades and competition (an "extrinsic" motivator).

I imagine he'd agree that individuals have primary and secondary motivations, where secondary ones are all about filling some combination of primary ones. He's just saying that the primary ones differ between people (and maybe between times of day), and thus trying to debunk the idea that some motivators traditionally thought of as extrinsic (e.g. monetary reward) can never be primary.

Re: Intrinsic motivation doesn't exist

#12

Post by Isamu »

The article does not support the claim with evidence, but argues the point. For me the most valuable bit was the suggestion at the end, that “Too many studies that supposedly prove intrinsic motivation have serious flaws in logic, or too many important uncontrolled variables,” he said. “There needs to be more scientific rigor.”

Re: Intrinsic motivation doesn't exist

#13

Post by drunkpotato »

10ren wrote: post #5

Warren Buffett's son described him thus: He likes to be right. It's just that when he's right, he makes a lot of money . In support of the article, a community is better off if people have (or develop) different motivations, in accordance with division of labour. Dawkins would probably damn any genetic basis of this as group selection, but it does make everyone better off. I agree that more research is required; but…

Dawkins would probably damn any genetic basis of this as group selection, but it does make everyone better off.

You contradicted yourself. Dawkins, at least in "The Selfish Gene", is much more subtle than most people give him credit for (subtlety makes for terrible sound-bites, like "Dawkins would damn...").

If an individual is part of a community in which there is a diversity of genes and a division of labor so that every individual in that community is more likely to reproduce their genes than individuals not in that community, then for each individual their bundle of genes will thrive. That is straight-up Dawkins. There is nothing to damn.

Re: Intrinsic motivation doesn't exist

#15

Post by edw519 »

Whether you agree there are 16 desires or not, he said there is not any way to reduce all of these desires to just two types.

Or just one. Now bear with me, but sometimes I wonder if Freud was right. There's only one real desire: to get laid.

  Why are you writing this software?
  Because people need it.

  Why can't they just use something else?
  Because mine's better.

  Why is yours better?
  Because it handles these 27 things no one else has considered.

  Why don't you just share those 27 things with the world?
  Because I want to be the one to do it.

  Why do you want to be the one to do it?
  So that I can earn admiration, recognition, and lots of money.

  Why do you want admiration, recognition, and money?
  So I can get a date.

  Isn't there an easier way to attract women?
  Not for me.

Re: Intrinsic motivation doesn't exist

#16

Post by mparr4 »

The title of the article is a bit misleading. This guy doesn't seem to be saying that intrinsic motivation doesn't exist, just that it isn't quite as simple as an intrinsic/extrinsic dichotomy would make it seem, which seems fair enough. However, to make the claim that there are 16 basic desires that motivate people (as this researcher does) is a simplification as well.

Any sort of quantization of the motivating factors in a person's life obviously cannot completely convey the true reality of the situation whether the number of factors is 2 or 16. This sort of quantization is certainly useful in talking about what motivates an individual, but given that it is a model and not reality itself, it's tough to say that one is more right than the other (or any other for that matter).

Re: Intrinsic motivation doesn't exist

#17

Post by mparr4 »

Here's a question: is there any place for value in science??

The researcher who is the focus of the article doesn't seem to think so. I've read a few books suggesting that that is exactly what science could use. What do you think?

Re: Intrinsic motivation doesn't exist

#18

Post by dhimes »

mparr4 wrote: post #16

The title of the article is a bit misleading. This guy doesn't seem to be saying that intrinsic motivation doesn't exist, just that it isn't quite as simple as an intrinsic/extrinsic dichotomy would make it seem, which seems fair enough. However, to make the claim that there are 16 basic desires that motivate people (as this researcher does) is a simplification as well. Any sort of quantization of the motivating fact…

He was skeptical of its existence:

“But there is no real evidence that intrinsic motivation even exists.”

Re: Intrinsic motivation doesn't exist

#19

Post by dhimes »

edw519 wrote: post #15

Whether you agree there are 16 desires or not, he said there is not any way to reduce all of these desires to just two types. Or just one. Now bear with me, but sometimes I wonder if Freud was right. There's only one real desire: to get laid. Why are you writing this software? Because people need it. Why can't they just use something else? Because mine's better. Why is yours better? Because it handles these 27 things…

Would a corollary be that good-looking, well built men (and women, too) are less motivated? Or maybe being motivated is what really gets men laid (or, at least, married).

Re: Intrinsic motivation doesn't exist

#20

Post by dkimball »

edw519 wrote: post #15

Whether you agree there are 16 desires or not, he said there is not any way to reduce all of these desires to just two types. Or just one. Now bear with me, but sometimes I wonder if Freud was right. There's only one real desire: to get laid. Why are you writing this software? Because people need it. Why can't they just use something else? Because mine's better. Why is yours better? Because it handles these 27 things…

Two words: Poop sock.

MMORPGs have everything to do with being in the zone, nothing to do with sexuality; these two motivations are both exceptionally powerful. I remember an experiment with rats, where an electrode was hooked up directly to the center in the brain that generates the "in the zone" feeling; the rats pushed the lever to fire that electrode continually, until they died of starvation. MMORPGs, computer games in general, Wikipedia, checking e-mail, Hacker News... all operate based on the desire to zone in.

Now, the popularity of well-paid parasitic professions in the contemporary US (law, most prominently, where the marginal value of a new lawyer is negative) reveals that the desire for money is very strong as well; but is the desire for money always the same as the desire for sexual relations? I don't see Dick Cheney living it up like Bill Clinton...

Of course, multiple motivations can be present at once; but I think that good work, at least in computer areas, requires the desire to zone in as one of these motivations.

Post reply on HN