Integrating Theories of Motivation

Integrating Theories of Motivation Author(s): Piers Steel and Cornelius J. Knig Source: The Academy of Management Review, Vol.
31, No. 4 (Oct., 2006), pp. 889-913 Published by: Academy of Management Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20159257 . Accessed: 20/03/2013 16:37
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Academy of Management is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Academy of Management Review.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 84.175.83.232 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:37:19 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Academy o?Management Review 2006,Vol. 31,No. 4, 889-913.
THEORIES OF MOTIVATION INTEGRATING

PIERS STEEL
University of Calgary
CORNELIUS J. K?NIG
Universit?t Z?rich
human behavior has been hindered toward understanding Progress by discipline our efforts. Fortunately, are con these separate endeavors bound theories, dividing on the fundamental and can be effectively features of verging integrated. Focusing expectancy prospect picoeconomics, theory, we theory, cumulative theory, and need a temporal motivational construct consistent with the theory (TMT). TMT appears other investigations, and behav from many major including findings psychobiology iorism. ior, and on a wide of TMT are numerous, The potential affecting our understanding implications behav stock market group behavior, range of topics, including job design, goal setting.
so decision making, fields of economics, a common share desire and ciology, psychology our human nature?that to understand is, our The or tempera essential character, disposition, ment. This extensive, multidisciplinar/y interest in establishing who we are reflects the enor mous As Pinker of the endeavor. ramifications theories of human nature have (2002) catalogs, relationships, lifestyles, and disastrous effects when governments?with on faulty models. based On a smaller applied and treatments, training, compensation, scale, on our theories of human selection all depend is an overtly Even job design, which behavior. been used to direct
sions
within
example, motivation,
has
These structure, and etiology. nomenclature, our subdivisions divide efforts, lim necessarily can to extent the which be shared. iting insights This problem has recently been recognized and lamented by many prominent researchers
for discipline. Psychology, the traditions of self-regulation, and personality, each with its own
each
Barrick & Mount, 1991; Elliot & Thrash, 2002;

a new Judge & Hies, 2002), but it is by no means issue. Consider the words of Irving Fisher, the venerated economist, which are regrettably still far too relevant: The fact that there are still two schools, the pro school, ductivity school and the psychological constantly crossing swords on this subject [time
preference/implicit economic science quate methods interest a rates] reflection by these is a scandal the in and employed on inade de would-be
(e.g.,
physical enterprise, requires positing human el ements such as "growth need strength" (Hack man & Oldham, the efficacy of 1976). To ensure our interventions, we need to determine what our actions. describes, drives, or decides our of behavior has Ironically, understanding been hindered by the very extent of our efforts. There is a superabundance of motivational the ories. Not only does each field have its particu lar interpretation, but there are ample subdivi
stroyers of each other (1930: 312).
our theories also have several Fortunately, and their inte effective strong commonalities, seems achievable (Klein, 1989; Larrick, gration to & Shoda, 1993; Mischel 1999). If it is possible do these different effectively combine nature?we of human will have conceptions a common toward the substantially progressed To use E. O. Wilson's ory of basic motivation. is an excellent term, this convergence example of consilience. this?to
We Mannix, ers' passing
are
thankful
that the editor
who
initially
produced Also, we a long chain
though insightful judgment. With her stewardship, a much better paper than what the combined greatly appreciate of prior researchers, publication. all appear
gave us critical
the opportunity
of our paper was Elizabeth to reply to the review comments the review we before process first submitted. from
contributions
for this present we agreements, cause.
who provided the edifice dis Despite regular academic to be laboring toward a common
is "a 'jumping to Consilience of the of facts and gether' knowledge linking by fact-based to create a theory across disciplines common groundwork of explanation" (1998: 8). If a theory can be shown to have consilience, its 889
890 Academy
of Management
Review
October
it is vastly validity improved, since avenues of different represents inquiry coming to similar conclusions. We begin by further re of such the importance and advantages viewing scientific integration. four closely related After this, we integrate motivational theories, using the insights of each to inform the others. We start with picoeconom ics (Ainslie, 1992), which we then subsequently expectancy theory (e.g., Vroom, 1964), cumulative prospect theory (Tversky & Kahneman, 1992), and need theory (e.g., Dollard & Miller, 1950). It is important to note that none of these theories is definitive, each containing var we are not attempt limitations. However, a in of full their every detail; integration ing we are on these stead, focusing linking together ba theories' most enduring and well-accepted sic features. One of the most important of these ious features Time tivated is time. is a critical extend with
We consider whether and when TMT or too simple. Finally, we too may complex on TMT scholars note that in future research to two choose may exploit powerful but under used venues: a computerized system of personal instruction and computer simulations. be
variance.
THE CASE FOR INTEGRATION

theme across the disparate disci of motivation is the decision and plines making desire formore comprehensive and integrated & Zbaracki, theories (Cooksey, 2001; Eisenhardt 1992; Langley, Saint-Macary, 1999; Meilers, ample, Locke and Latham, writing about the fu ture of motivational that conclude research, "there is now an urgent need to tie these theo ries and model" in his & Pitcher, Posada, Mintzberg, & 1995; Leonard, Beauvais, Scholl, Schwartz, & Cooke, 1998). For ex A common
of choice or mo component As Drucker notes, "The time behavior. is inherent in management because dimension is forac concerned with decisions management
modeling" Donovan
tended to other theories where previously we label the outcome of absent. Consequently, our integrative efforts temporal motivational on time as of its emphasis theory (TMT) because a motivational factor. After constructing TMT, we review its essen tial elements and when it, rather than its source should be applied. We also use pro a prototypical crastination, prob performance the workings of TMT. As a lem, to explicate theories,
(1990) and (1990: 228). Also, Kanfer are epi that theories (2001) critique for have sodic and, thus, difficulty accounting over events. time time and behavior Fortunately, or delay does feature in several motivational is consistent where its application formulations, it can be ex included, and through integration itwas
tion" (1954: 15). Similarly, Luce states that "quite of a decision realization clearly any empirical tree has a strong temporal aspect," and the fail ure to include time "is a clear failing of the
the important that incorporates self-regulation various of theories" (2001: 69; em components two funda This desire reflects added). phases in motivational research. mental challenges are inade traditional First, many paradigms or for realistic quate discussing exploring many and
into an overall processes together recommends (2004: 389). Also, Donovan review of motivation that "future work should move towards the development and val of model idation of an integrated, goal-based
situations. the very Second, complex our of field is being hindered progress by seg
regation.
inte yet to be a broad, the of motivation, any particular grated theory a mo deals with subset of ory necessarily only a theory may deal tivational factors. Although it potentially will with these factors very well, situations. have trouble in intricate, realistic a to situation's very complexity, a larger Owing Because there has of forces may be operating. Conse ex no single theory can adequately For example, the observed plain phenomena. rationality expectancy theory, which represents in economics, is the simplest and consequently variety quently, has been criticized has for its limitations. Consider research able cates we act
theory of human behavior, general tions of TMT are numerous. We that might benefit by diverse areas in specific ways. Also, we note that human Some while balance behavior, between
the applica identify four
like all models, and parsimony. precision refinements may add undue complexity incremental for only minimal accounting
employing this model of must strike a
it
that indi been summarized less than logically 1994; (Lopes, is so Thaler, 1992). In fact, irrational behavior "The eco that Albanese concludes, pervasive in is violated of rationality nomic assumption the behavior of every person" (1987: 14).
2006 Steel and K?nig 891 than Rather has which long and has proven more flexible by lished has abandon expectancy theory, been the dominant paradigm it much value, we can make integrating itwith other estab principles. This approach into adjacent fields and different solu passed tions to be effectively harmonized. As economists and psychologists. Consider Lopes notes, they have been less than coll?gial in the past, tending to view each other with considerable
motivational
motivational than
them.
grasp range of areas, such as retirement failures, cults, crime, savings, organizational and politics. Later in this paper, we also discuss several complex topics where a larger variety of a broad to be operating factors appear An integrated per typically considered. in better understanding is invaluable spective In addition, argued vational scholars have observed
take salience lof argues that his field should to into account, individuals' salience referring undue sensitivity to the present and consequent that the of the future. He shows undervaluing more to allows concept expectancy fully theory
been proposed Akerlof already by George economist. Aker (1991), the Nobel Prize-winning
and distaste" (1994: "suspicion several 198). Similarly, W?rneryd (1988) quotes on psychol eminent economists whose words ogy border on the vitriolic. In fact, Loewenstein that there has long been an ac (1992) observes tive attempt to erase any psychological content from economics. But, more recently, there has integration, in the form of behavioral economic Traditional theory, essen
been some economics.
tially expectancy theory, is being supplemented with some of the very concepts later that we stress here (e.g., personality traits, temporal dis loss aversion). As Camerer, Loewen counting, stein, and Rabin (2004) review, this is fundamen tally
that continued segregation to scientific is detrimental theories is serious. The Steers, Mow progress. problem note and that the theoretical devel day, Shapiro of work motivation has opment significantly lagged behind other fields, that we still widely rely on obsolete that intellectual "seemed and interest discredited in
as well as of our moti:
the economic field reshaping power by basing improving its explanatory more realistic psychological foundations.
and it on
to decline
is that "the fragmen tation and disparate, but overlapping, lines of research within the self-regulation domain have made any attempt at furthering our knowledge an arduous task" (2000: 753). Similarly, Wilson that the (1998), as well as Staats (1999), argues sciences is for the social slow progress specifi of the lack of consilience?the cally because lack of integration. As Wilson writes: Social scientists by and large spurn the idea of the hierarchical that ordering of knowledge unites and drives the natural science. Split into independent cadres, they stress precision in their words within their specialty but seldom speak
the same technical
Zeidner, Boekaerts, jor reason for this decline
theories, and the topic has (2004: 383). As precipitously" and Pintrich conclude, a ma
in different fields. This should make working across disci communication and collaboration more ef easier. it much allows Second, plines
among Consequently, fostering integration is important different motivational disciplines the development and possible. of First, it allows a common scientists social among language
and effective treatment requires investigating all these possibilities to find the most promising and pliable junctures for intervention. Third, it allows insights to be shared with fields overlap (i.e., ping in terms of features and complexity treatments Psychological "cross-pollenization"). for addiction, for example, may inform the eco nomic formulations of retirement grams (e.g., Akerlof, 1991; 1992). As we show later, the generation facilitates in a range of hypotheses havior to goal setting. pro saving Loewenstein & Elster, an integrative theory of new and plausible topics, from group be
to complex motivational fective responses prob can be multifaceted. As a later lems, which of procrastination self confirms, example failure can occur formany reasons, regulatory
to the next (1998: 182). Wilson ences notes, advance
language
from one
specialty
however,
that
the medical
sci To develop
DEVELOPING TMT
derstandings expectancy theory, cumulative and need (CPT), theory. These TMT, we consider of human nature: four related un picoeconomics, prospect theory four postulations
of because rapidly primarily can approach consilience. Researchers prob lems at many different but mutually supporting levels of complexity, to be allowing insights
892 Academy
of Management
Review
October
To further underscore that other formulations. we are integrating motivational fundamentals, we begin section by noting similarities each theories. We start with pi with other prominent coeconomics ered, has since it, of all the theories consid time as its most central feature. or Hyperbolic
thermore, they can be expressed formulaically, transla their integration with minimal allowing tion and in a relatively straightforward manner. The terms in these formulations also provide a fea of each theory's primary ready summary are also evident in a variety of tures, which
well for consolidation, suited particularly sources common in their de reflect they terms. share Conse and, thus, many velopment are areas of overlap quite definite. Fur quently, since
are
Of these, thematching law is one of the first and 1967).1 The match simplest (Chung & Herrnstein, how frequency, magnitude, ing law considers and delay of reinforcement affect choices, with various among describing variable-interval administered, concurrently schedules (Ainslie, 1992). In other words, when we must choose among several courses of action that all result in a reward, albeit at different choice best predicts the aggregate times, this model of adults behaviors & Green, (see Myerson 1995). in Similarly, a related version of this law used field also shows extremely strong & Prelec, (see Loewenstein 1992). validity The simplest version of the matching law con tains just four components: the economic delay being nant model the critical feature. It is the domi
and the efforts from behaviorist Summarizing sev notes economic Ainslie (1992) perspectives, to provide an accurate eral attempts equation.
Picoeconomics
Discounting
Ainslie (1992), under the title of Picoeconomics, and Ainslie and Haslam (1992), under the title of a theory that discuss Discounting, Hyperbolic over time. to account for behavior choice of helps The considerable demonstrates theory already consilience, with Ainslie drawing support from a variety of research literature, including sociology, and psychodynamic social psychology, psychol as as and eco well behaviorist ogy, psychology in particular.
Utilit?
Rate
X Amount
Delay
(1)
for a course of ac Utility indicates preference tion. Naturally, the higher the utility, the greater The next three variables the preference. reflect or of of action. the the reward aspects payout Rate
In choosing them, we have an among fu innate tendency to inordinately undervalue ture events. We tend, then, to put off tasks lead in favor of ones ing to distant but valuable goals lesser rewards. In with more immediate though time marches and as the on, however, evitably, tivities. once-future events loom ever closer, we see their we experience more clearly. Eventually, we have if regret irrationally put off pursuing this more valuable goal to the extent that it can no longer be realistically achieved. the this description, Going beyond qualitative to ef the tries of express picoeconomics theory value fects of temporal discounting mathematically.
discounting, with the journal of Psycho an entire issue recently dedicating pharmacology Brad to the construct (e.g., Ho, Mobini, Chiang, shaw, & Szabadi, 1999). In its basic form, the theory is simple. We must from a variety of possible choose rewarding ac perbolic
the personality For example, and of future orientation all traits impulsiveness to the concept of hy have strong commonalities recent work in In addition, perbolic discounting. underscores the importance of hy psychobiology nomics
indicates the amount of ing certainty. Amount it reward that is received on payout. Essentially, indicates the magnitude of the incentive. Fi one nally, delay indicates how long, on average, must wait to receive the payout. Since delay is in the denominator of the equation, the longer the delay, the less valuable the course of action is perceived. There also have been several modifications of
or frequency that indicates the expectancy to action the reward. the will lead It ranges from 0 percent to 100 percent, with 100 percent reflect
the basic since delay ered at average
create longer necessarily a new is typi Also, parameter delays. to capture individual differences cally included to the The greater sensitivity delay. regarding on effect the the have sensitivity, larger delays lower rates choice. Of all these modifications, Mazur's (1987)
law. Rate is often dropped, matching in terms of it can be partially expressed alone; over repeated trials, rewards deliv
1 This matching law can be further decomposed more basic behaviorist (Hernnstein, principles invariance and relativity. specifically,
into even 1979)?
2006 Steel and K?nig 893 equation spread: is likely the simplest Amount and most wide Preference Saving Cash
FIGURE 1
Reversal Between Spending and As a Function of Time Remaining to Bonus and Hyperbolic Discounting
-
Utility
Aside
z + T{T_t)
(2)
determinant of instantaneous utility. In addition, can be used the reciprocal of this equation to instead of predict preferences among punishers rewards (Mazur, 1998). Consequently, people tomore instant ones. prefer distant punishers There have been several other attempts to fur ther refine this equation, but without estab lished success. For example, into explorations other mathematical using expressions (e.g., Logue, Rodriguez, Pe?a-Correal,
the sensitivity. Finally, Z is a constant from when rewards are immediate. It the prevents equation rocketing toward infinity under periods of small delay and, thus, in Shiz the (1999) terminology, can be considered gal's greater derived
from dropping three rate, there are ? from the t law. T changes original matching refers to the delay of the reward in terms of "time reward" minus "time now." T refers to the to subject's sensitivity delay. The larger T is, the
High
Spending Saving
Utility
Preference
reversal
Low Now Time Future t2
Expectancy
Theory
X value (E X Expectancy theory, or expectancy V) theory, represents an extensive family of in dividual formulations. Vroom (1964) first intro to industrial-organizational duced the notion
model.
In economics, this phenomenon is stud the designation of time preference or 1991). implicit interest rate (Antonides, 1 outlines picoeconomics Figure by display the ing utility curves for two courses of action: or immediately an expected saving spending financial bonus. From a distance, both options are effectively discounted, and the benefits of ied under the bo saving appear superior. However, when nus is received from the employer, at time tl, the the sav spending benefits are immediate while benefits remain distant. Because of ing temporal
& Maruo, 1984), functions,2 tend not to exponential particularly be as accurate & McFadden, (Green, Myerson, 1997; Mazur, 2001), although they are still fa vored in economic circles because of their close to a purely resemblance rational discount
tancy, ifnot identical in some respects (Bandura & Locke, 2003; Skinner, 1996; Vancouver, Thomp son, & Williams, when 2001). Also, Gollwitzer,
theories. To begin with, Bandura (1997) inte behavior (1991) theory of planned grates Ajzen's into the traditional E X V framework. In turn, has been self-efficacy theory, which champi oned by Bandura, is closely to expec related
but it has an earlier history in the psychology, field cognitive (e.g., Rotter, 1954) that, in turn, can be predated un by economic investigations der the rubric of subjective expected utility (Ber in several noulli, 1954). Its core elements appear
discounting, changing crossing established
of preference reversal phenomenon Loewenstein & (Ainslie, 1992; Prelec, 1992; Steel, in press). What is planned today does not al turn into tomorrow's actions. ways
2
find themselves people likely their original and this intentions, of utility lines reflects the well
= e-r(T-i)Value example, Utility & stein, 2002). O'Donoghue, For
his model of action phases, states, discussing are established "Preferences the by employing evaluative criteria of feasibility and desirabil is related to ity" (1996: 289). Plainly, feasibility a while is form of value. expectancy, desirability E X V theories suggest that a process akin to rational gambling determines choices among courses of action. For each option, two consider ations are made: that (1) what is the probability this outcome will be achieved, and (2) how much is the expected outcome valued? Multiplying these components, and value (i.e., expectancy E X V), the action as that is then appraised largest is the one most likely to be pursued. A is that they are major limitation to E X V models have difficulty ac and, as mentioned, episodic over time (Kanfer, 1990). for behavior counting This limitation may partially explain Van Eerde
(Frederick,
Loewen
894 Academy
of Management
Review
October
and Thierry's (1996) meta-analytic finding that over time rather E X V often predicts behavior and significantly than one's less well weakly intention to perform. Fortunately, its incorpora tion into a hyperbolic discounting model largely rectifies this weakness. As mentioned, of the original the numerator two law terms: amount is of matching composed and rate. Respectively, these terms are equiva lent to value and expectancy, reflecting a shift to a cognitive standpoint. The view expresses vari the equation's behavioral in terms of what should be objectively ables observed. from a behavioral
CPT
(1992) CPT, an up Tversky and Kahneman's date of Kahneman and Tversky's (1979) prospect a is model theory, descriptive closely related to kinson's At expectancy theory, particularly revision formulation. The is (1957) major the introduction of an "approach/avoidance" di traditional
is extremely well supported by chotomy, which other research. Elliot and Thrash (2002), as well as Carver, Sutton, and Scheier (2000), review a of findings from a variety of motiva its existence. formulations that supports in their psy Ito and (1999), Similarly, Cacioppo confluence tional
The cognitive view recognizes that the not is all variables uniform but of the impact on in differences among interpretation depends in the dividuals, difficulty determining although these differences amount
rate refers perception. Similarly, lead to rewards that actions quency
be extreme. Conse may more in is described accurately quently, as attractiveness terms the perceived cognitive or aversiveness It reflects a sub of the outcome. on an individual's jective evaluation, dependent to the fre or, alterna the expected
of motivation, pro investigation chobiological a "bivariate of model evaluative pose space," con which note also provides they themselves to vergent validity prospect theory. as one of the leading theories Often described of decision 1992), CPT
& Wakker, 1997; Levy, (e.g., Fennema choice under uncer seeks to describe is derived, as how value tainty by reconsidering well as how expectancy should be transformed. of Here, we review only the pertinent aspects CPT: a full discussion of the original and cumu lative version of prospect theory requires more attention than can be easily provided, although it is available
of acquiring tively, the probability as amount outcome. By describing returning rate to the equation expectancy, picoeconomics late expectancy theory. should be as follows:
and value in the form of to encapsu begins final equation
The
elsewhere & Wak (see Fennema ker, 1997, and Tversky & Kahneman, 1992). Also, exam for a relevant and recent psychological ple, see Hunton, Hall, and Price (1998), who ap ply original prospect theory
decision
= Expectancy X Value utilit* + nr-o? ?z
to the value
making.
of
(3)
"voice"
refers to whether, having been Instrumentality rewards will be forth the successful, expected that this indicates, however, coming. Research to predicting modification may be detrimental behavior, rather Thierry, been proposed, for resource allocation 1996). Many & (Van Eerde helpful have other refinements terms that account including than
can be argued Of course, other modifications Vroom For from expectancy example, theory. down into two compo (1964) breaks expectancy In this nents: expectancy and instrumentality. the intended refers towhether case, expectancy course of action can be completed successfully.
on its key theoretical elements, CPT Focusing is very similar to the original prospect theory. across considerable variability Acknowledging in how both theories people, codify regularities
we
in participative
ues
that are defined as losses and gains in reference to some status quo or baseline. are transformed outcomes These a concave is function that for gains, following convex for losses, and steeper In other words, losses for losses
interpret
values
and
are based
on outcomes
expectancies.
First,
val
than for
(e.g., Kanfer & Acker man, 1996; Naylor, Pritchard, & Ilgen, 1980) and future orientation (e.g., Raynor & Entin, 1982). of the individual formulation, Regardless E X V is the core aspect.
abilities whereas
loom larger than is Second, (i.e., expectancy) gains. probability also transformed following a function that has both convex and concave segments. Lower prob gains. (i.e., overweighted), tend to be concave higher probabilities to the determina Similar (i.e., underweighted). tion of values, the exact parameters for the tend to be convex
transformation and gains.
differ for losses of probability the utility of expected Consequently,
2006 Steel and K?nig 895 on considering is based the com any behavior and bined utility of its possible gains possible losses, with gains and losses each being esti events. The in Tversky and of capacity, be "can words, interpreted as the event" of the respective contribution notion
Kahneman's
mated
differently.3 By itself, CPT suffers the same limitation that out for expectancy theo Kanfer (1990) pointed is, the failure to include time as a vari ry?that able. have al other researchers Consequently, various of prospect integrations ready proposed time-discounting theory with some hyperbolic function (Loewenstein
marginal effec all possibilities (1992: 301). To combine is evaluated incremental tively, each outcome to the value of other out is, relative ly?that comes. For example, the expectancy weighting
2000; Given
& Prelec, 1992; Rachlin, & Groenewoud, 1997). Schouwenburg to this foundation and CPT's similarity are to two terms needed expectancy theory, only incorporate CPT into picoeconomics.
it for any positive event is the weighted chance or an even better outcome will occur, minus the chance the next better outcome will weighted occur (e.g., similar to 40 percent 30 percent = It is helpful to keep 10 percent, except weighted). inmind the simple circumstance where only one one outcome outcome and/or negative positive
X CPT CPT _ V ^CPTX ^CPT V TTx-l-x _ _ + Z Utility 2, z + r(r t) i=k+l z + r(r t) i=l
is considered. In this case, the capacity of each outcome is equal to ECPT, and the equation is more readily interpretable as no summation is necessary. available is Further discussion of capacity in the articles of Fennema and Wak
(4)
n possible one considers For any decision, outcomes. The first term, containing E?PT and for the ex values reflects the transformed VqPT, the with k and associated per pectancy gains ceived value of each reflects the term, containing associ transformed values for the expectancy value k losses and the perceived ated with n of these gains. E?PT and V?PT, The second
ker (1997) and, of course, Tversky and Kahneman
(1992).
Need One
Theory of the earlier
of each of these losses. Given that losses carry term will always di value, the second negative minish the firstand, thus, the overall utility. The summation sign for each term reflects the pos of outcomes given any act and, multiple sibility thus, multiple possible gains or losses. It is this
theories was psychological a it is of needs. As whole, (1938) system Murray's in somewhat but key aspects endure dated, as modern 1991), personality theory (Tellegen, well as in the decision-making (Loe paradigm wenstein, appear traits 1996). For example, personality to be the behavioral of needs, expression needs as measured especially by questionnaire
summation sign that makes CPT cumulative. to model Of note, although the ability deci a outcomes sions with multiple is sig possible it takes a moment to con nificant improvement, is interpreted under this sider how expectancy model. With CPT the decision weight or ECpt is not absolute of but the capacity expectancy
(Winter, John, Stewart, Klohnen, & Duncan, 1998). we tend to be extroverted partly Consequently, because of a need for affiliation and conscien of a need for achievement. tious partly because We briefly review need theory's fundamental To begin, needs represent an internal energy force that directs behavior toward actions that and release of the need permit the satisfaction itself (i.e., satiation). This face is what drives us can be primary or to do whatever we do. Needs to our biological viscerogenic, directly related or they can be nature the for need food), (e.g., or to our person related secondary psychogenic,
components.
3 Mathematically, create expectancy notably ticeable similar
both curves
the transformations
for value
and
to Fechner's
reflecting logarithmic law (1966) describing
functions, just no
law states differences. Fechner's that, perceptual x a will notice of Ax that allows k amount, you given change to remain a constant, as in Ax/x = k. To be precise, however, use a related and Kahneman but (1992) actually form of psychophysical called "Steven's exponential scaling law." Similarly, is also modeled expectancy using an expo be de nential these functions may function. Informally, Tversky scribed as the principle of diminishing returns.
ality. Of these secondary needs, Murray initially that around twenty might exist, al guessed Winter that only three (1996) suggests though are fundamental: the need for achievement, the need need for affiliation, for achievement obstacles, and the need is deriving the need for power. pleasure for affiliation The from
overcoming
896 Academy
of Management
Review
October
from socializing intimacy is deriving pleasure and sharing with people, and the need forpower is deriving pleasure from gaining strength or another's prestige, particularly by affecting are not stable but tend These needs well-being. to fluctuate in intensity, ranging from a slum to an absolute craving. bering satisfaction are ruled partly by need inten Our behaviors that is the most in sity. At any time, the need tense is the one we attempt to satisfy or to re duce through our thoughts and behavior. our actions represent our needs. Of most tance, need intensity can be influenced ternal when have and, that Thus, impor by ex
vides
a classic formulation of expectancy the some of ory, as well as Hull (1943), who provides of behavior influential the most formulations
theory by far (Schwartz, 1989). Of note, behavior ism is, as mentioned, of the original the basis of law and Herrnstein (1967). matching Chung Core aspects are virtually pectancy
as press. Press occurs cues, described we encounter situations that we expect a good chance of soon satisfying a need, and intensity of the salience consequently, acute. Press has strong com need become with many modern constructs. psychological review, Tellegen
other
mentally place of utility, Hull indicates excitatory poten uses to tial (sEr), while Atkinson tendency success of expectancy, achieve (Ts). In place strength (sHr), while Atkin in of success (Ps).5 Finally, of value, Hull refers to a combination of place drive (D) and incentive (K), while Atkinson uses motive (INs). strength (Ms) and incentive value In McClelland's is equiv terms, Ms for success Hull refers to habit son uses probability
of Atkinson's and Hull's theories identical, both ultimately using ex frameworks that differ funda by value in in nomenclature. For example, only
monalities lished hensive

to
(1991) connects
(e.g.,
and well-estab In a compre

stimulus-re
press
several
theories
the most utility. actions that provide pursue to determine Needs are related to value, helping have. Although that outcomes the actual value or at an average needs are often conceptualized a trait level, they do fluctuate because of satia
(e.g., Allport, 1961).4 of need theory share numerous aspects formu with our previous strong commonalities lations. First, need intensity appears analogous to utility. In the same way we pursue actions that most reduce our strongest need, we also sponse) These
and
theorists
In addition, At alent to need for achievement. kinson proposes that the utility of any achieve is determined situation ment-oriented by two factors: for the need individual-difference failure. The the need to avoid has on overall utility is calcu as with losses and gains in lated separately, the ten CPT, with the resulting value indicating dency to pursue achievement. Dollard and Miller (1950) provide even greater achievement effect each and need some connection. They also attempt to describe of the conflicts observed with psychodynamic drives or needs Consis through behaviorism. tentwith the concept of press, Dollard and Miller as we get note that drive strength increases of our goals. This, they closer to the realization
the trait tion. To predict aggregated behavior, level will suffice (Epstein & O'Brien, 1985), but for specific outcomes, we would prefer to know a need's specific strength. Finally, press is essen tially a combination lay. As we discuss
and time de of expectancy later, others have reviewed in great detail. these connections To some extent, need theory can be further works of McClelland the integrated through
is due to the combined effect of two explain, more basic principles of behaviorism: the gradi ents of reinforcement and of stimulus generali zation. The gradient of reinforcement reflects the is, the more immediately temporal aspect?that are expected, the and punishment of stimulus their effects. The greater gradient is akin to the element of expect generalization cues best create approach ancy. Environmental rewards and avoidance behavior when they reliably pre dict the occurrence of rewards and punishments.
McClelland (1985)and Dollard and Miller (1950).

the theories of Atkinson (1964), who pro
reviews
4 a
There
has
been Savage
criticism view
that drive
or need
reduction and in a de
is
somewhat review
tailed ever,
also Savage invaluable proven tional states,
that this is true. How (2000) concludes it has notes that, as a general concept, a wide for organizing range of motiva with its use here. Also, see is consistent which (1999), who recently in motivation. play revitalized the
simplified
of reinforcement,
and Swindell McSweeney role that need theory may
5 while their similarity, Weiner, reviewing Highlighting notes that "there was the history of motivational research, some contentment in eliminating the term drive and merely of notion of that the habit with (1990: expectancy" replacing 619).
2006 Steel and K?nig 897 to be largely de far, need theory appears same rived from the fundamental features as picoeconomics, expectancy theory, and CPT. Be havior is determined by need strength (utility), and long-term considerations (delayed) are only relevant to the extent they affect its present in So tion as an example of TMT?a phenomenon is uniquely suitable for explanation. Fundamental Features that
two relatively tensity. Need theory also provides The first has already been unique contributions. mentioned?that need theory explicates the in dividual determinants of value need for (e.g., The second regards the discount achievement). is presently which treated as constant, T, ing identical for both losses and gains. However, and Miller (1950) suggest in drive occurs at different
TMT has four core features: value, expectancy, time, and different functions for losses versus across gains. The first of these, value, appears on CPT and need the all four sources. Drawing or ory, value represents how much satisfaction drive is believed to real reduction an outcome ize. The attractiveness on of an event depends
Dollard crease
that this in rates for dif
the situation and individual differences. can Outcomes satisfy needs to different degrees. A full meal,
both
In their words, ferent needs. "The strength of more avoidance increases rapidly with near ness than does that of approach. In other words, the gradient of avoidance is steeper than that of recent research, as (1950: 352). More approach" (2003), sug by Trope and Liberman the actu however?that losses gests opposite, are less discounted than ally steeply gains. De these these both results differences, spite T not indicate that should be commonly kept at a constant but should differ forgains and losses. our formula is revised reviewed
Consequently, fashion:
in this
"suffonsified." To precisely sufficiently a value for predict specific person and option, we must determine present need strength and how satisfying that option is perceived. If either of these approach zero, then value itself will ready also
individual differences, peo Figure 2. Regarding differ in the ple degree they typically experience any need (e.g., need forpower), and there can be fluctuations around this baseline. Hungry peo are more motivated ple by food than those al
can assuage an appe for example, tite better than a light snack. Furthermore, the outcome and value between is cur relationship vilinear and relative to a reference point, as per
Utility
2j
i=l
7 + , r+,T _ A z r+(r -1)
^
i=k+l
z + r-(r -1)
become negligible. occurs in each theory except pico Expectancy economics. It represents the perceived probabil ity that an outcome will occur. Like value, this is influenced by both the situation and different individual events have
(5)
we have con With this final modification, structed TMT. It is an assimilation of the com mon and unique fundamental features across our four target theories.
differences.
Plainly, of occurring. How higher and lower likelihoods ever, there are also stable trends regarding how
FIGURE 2
Valence Weighted (VCPT) As a Function of Valence {V). Per Tversky and Unweighted Kahneman's (1992) CPT
TMT
TMT is derived above-described of motivation: from the core elements of the four well-established theories
the picoeconomics, expectancy and need TMT indicates that CPT, ory, theory. can be understood motivation by the effects of and weakened value, expectancy by delay, with differences for rewards and
CPT
Unweighted valence
= Va
losses. The theory is and here we review 5, represented by Equation its fundamental features. We also consider how the use of TMT can be harmonized with its four source theories. Finally, we provide procrastina
-10 -5
10
Weighted
valence
898
Academy
of Management
Review
October
these likelihoods. perceive ultimately people events to overestimate We tend low-probability and underestimate events, as high-probability we have generalized expec per Figure 3. Also, tancies that increase and decrease estimation 1989). A few specific person (Carver & Scheier, are attribu affect traits that expectancies ality tional style (Weiner, (Ban 1991), self-efficacy dura, (Carver & Scheier, 1997), and optimism
that, for each of TMT's com chotomy indicates are individual that affected ponents by and differences (value, expectancy, D, there are on whether the further differences depending or outcome is perceived negatively positively. 2 and 3, taken from prospect theory, in Figures are how value and expectancy dicate likely between transformed. Differences positive and have not yet been de negative impulsiveness finitively established, although they do appear et al. (2004) effectively re to differ. As Camerer con view, there are a variety of methodological founds
2002).
appears discounting Temporal nomics and need theory (i.e., press). bottom of Equation 5, the closer temporally an event becomes, the greater its influence will be. of TMT that capture There are three components is time. The first of refers to the effect T, which people's trait to delay. In traditional sensitivity and Ainslie (1999) ar terminology, Monterosso to impulsive gue that T is largely equivalent
in picoeco Being on the
in that can affect discounting research, of the (i.e., people presence savoring cluding to delay and savor a reward), and the wishing can be perceived as a loss or a same outcome upon context. Still, we expect gain, depending follows the same pattern as that impulsiveness losses loom larger. This would be value, where consistent with recent psychobiological investi (Ito & Cacioppo, gations for short-term events feet"), which should 1999), reflecting caution
indeed, several others have gathered their that empirically support self-report data & Bickel, 1997; (Madden, Petry, Badger, affinity 1996, 1997; Petry, 2001; Richards, Ostaszewski, Zhang, Mitchell, & de Wit, 1999). Impulsiveness should never reach zero and is mostly stable, ness, and, there may although er/s such as alcohol
influenc be environmental alcohol Steele (i.e., myopia; use and & losephs, (Bretteville 1990) drug et al., 2002). The second is Jensen, 1999; Giordano itself?that the delay is, (T t). Simply, it repre or time required to realize an sents the nearness that outcome. The third is Z. This is a constant infinite prevents desire or utility from becoming is effectively zero. when delay cal losses and gains are separately Finally, culated in both CPT and need theory. This di
"cold (e.g., developing more be evolutionary & Tooby, 2000). Still, this (Cosmides adaptive not preclude individuals trend does atypical for gains. who are more impulsive Hierarchical The Nature of TMT between TMT and
FIGURE 3
Weighted (ECPT) As a Function of (E), Per Tversky and Expectancy Unweighted Kahneman's (1992) CPT Expectancy 1
0.8 EtCPT Er
in tend to explore particular aspects for example, theory greater depth; only need Conse the role of satiation. closely examines do not make them quently, their commonalities redundant. As Locke and Latham also conclude, theories "do not so much as contra motivational tures and dict one another the motivational focus on different aspects of (2004: 389). We argue, process" then, that these theories are not in competition but, rather, should be viewed hierarchically. we mean that each theory By "hierarchical," as different benefits by focusing on spe provides This and levels of analysis. cific components in the is natural arrangement implicit already
picoeco nomics, expectancy theory, CPT, and need the ory is largely that of simplicity. The latter theo on of TMT, focusing ries are simplifications or varia terms fewer eliminating idiographic fea tion. However, they also have some unique relationship
Weighted
expectancy
0.6
(Er+(l-Er)l/y
0.2 0 ?i-1-1-1? 0.2
0.4
0.6 expectancy
0.8
sciences,
where
"domains
reach
across
many
Unweighted
from chemical physics and to molecular genetics, chem chemistry physical None of ical ecology, and ecological genetics. levels of complexity,
2006 Steel and K?nig 899 more than a is considered the new specialties focus of research" 1998: (Wilson, 11). For exam a a a travel and ple, globe, guide, housing blue are all maps, and although print they focus on different each have pectancy at all, and its treatment of value is less But it is extremely explicit regard sophisticated. issues. When time is the critical ing temporal is invaluable. variable, picoeconomics Finally,
in two primary ploy a version assumes which garding bilities
on this matter: advice port Albert Einstein's "Make everything as simple as possible, but not the Choose that the simpler." theory emphasizes features relevant to the issue at hand. The sim plest of these is expectancy theory, which comes forms. Economists called "expected no individual typically em utility theory," re differences
features and levels of complexity, they their own purpose and do not make the others irrelevant. In determining which theory to use, we sup
need
this theory best represents is value and how we individual differences affect value. When want to understand how a person's traits affect his or her behavior, need theory is the most useful. individual ment Of note, even when are differences may we
to all those similar theory has elements but they are not always well defined. discussed, For example, the theory folds expectancy and time into the single concept of press. The issue
introduces cognitive pected utility theory, which limitations and allows rationality to be bounded 1986; Simon, (Furnham & Lewis, 1955). That is, ease for and it can be accuracy trading speed, adequate although decisions based on limited input and processing (i.e., we satisfice rather than maximize). Subjec norma tive expected utility theory is partially we the since is that take a tive, assumption rational rational tomake not optimal
the formulation of expectancies. Proba situation reflect the entirely, which we or error. The theory is perceive without inflection should be normative, reflecting how people have, if rational. ex The next level of complexity is subjective
der which This
limitations tive employment. At the highest all
that recognize measure relevant, still preclude their effec is TMT, un are nested.
influenced by individual differences. Because it has the most number of terms, it is also the most to use. However, cumbersome in the following section we review a common example where all these features are needed for explanation.
for explaining situa theory is appropriate tions where expectancy, value, and time all af fect decision making and are all simultaneously
level of complexity the previous theories
An Example
of TMT
approach when dealing with our cogni tive constraints. Consequently, the expectancy ory and subjective expected utility theory are most applicable to situations where people do rational decision making, such as approximate in aspects of stock market behavior (e.g., Plott,
and need theory can all CPT, picoeconomics, as operating be considered at the next level of is descriptive Each in that it is complexity. based on empirical findings regarding how peo ple actually behave, but each focuses on differ ent determinants of this behavior. Of these, CPT is most closely related to expectancy theory. Ex pectancy
1986;Smith, 1991).
a prototypical motivational Procrastination, that occurs in at least problem, is a phenomenon 95 percent of the population and chronically in 15 to 20 percent of adults and in approximately 33 to 50 percent of students It (Steel, in press). also appears that oniy TMT can account for its review in empirical findings. As meta-analytic dicates (Steel, in press), the strongest correlates are with procrastination task characteristics and individual-difference (e.g.,
need (e.g.,
expectancy
value
to variables related task self-efficacy, difficulty),

task aversive
for achievement,
the power of 1 straighten the lines in Figures 2 CPT how reconcile 3). emphasizes people Pi pluses and minuses when making decisions. and
coeconomics, however, does not consider ex
theory is directly nested under CPT, representing a special case where all the values for the exponential functions are constrained to be to the power of 1 (i.e., exponential functions to
to delay ness), and sensitivity (e.g., impulsive ness, temporal distance). A viable theory must contain variables that address all three of these at both an individual elements and situational does this, no other theory a variety of other re Furthermore, sults support the TMT model. Procrastinators demonstrate for example, reversal, preference consistent with hyperbolic discounting (see Fig ure 1). That is, they plan towork but change their minds and fail to act on their plans. level. Since is feasible. TMT alone
900
Academy
of Management
Review
October
Although resulting in reduced performance. written assignment is given at the beginning a semester, the student often ignores it until last few weeks or even
for the college stu setting is the essay paper to the student's inten dent. Counter original the tions, he or she irrationally delays writing to the it close then complete paper and must often incurring great stress and final deadline,
we can use a simplified sce Consequently, on to demonstrate nario based procrastination to behavior. The archetypal how TMT relates
FIGURE 4
Graph of Three Socializing of a Semester Course
200 150 100 Utility 50 0 -50 -100 Sept. 15 Oct. 8 Oct. 31 Time Nov. 23 Dec. 16 November 29 ? Desire Desire ? ? Desire ? ? Desire - to socialize to study?Ann to study?Betty to study?Colin
Utility Estimation Versus Writing an Essay over Students' That Ends December
for the 15
the of
the
there is no delay students; a pun in itand experiencing engaging ishment. The reward of achievement, however, itmay not be felt until the is relatively distant; even later, when end of the semester, or perhaps are the matter, so To compound posted. grades activity between for many cial activities and intrinsically enjoyable; in their pursuit or their rewards. Also, are of socializing the aversive consequences an creates in them distant. Although indulging we can fore of work, usually backlog oppressive stall confronting the consequence until much
later.
days. this is not surprising. spective, course As TMT predicts, we pursue whatever action has level of the highest of utility. Writing an essay paper is often an intrinsically aversive
From a TMT per
December
available no delay
and
other temptations
are
readily there is
its utility. Similarly, the negative minishing imme is for still component writing experienced now its is but also component positive diately, its thus imminent, increasing utility. relatively increas becomes activity eventually Writing occur ingly likely as the deadline approaches, on November 29 forAnne, ring, in this example, six later for but days Betty and Colin, on Decem ber 5. Note that Colin's makes impulsiveness motivation him a mercurial individual, whose the final moments should overshadow during the others' best efforts. of TMT, any of the components By changing a multitude we could generate of other exam
semester, although positive compo socializing's nent is still temporally unchanged, its negative is more di proximate, component temporally
three college Consider students, Anne, Betty, an essay at and Colin, who have been assigned on September 15. The the start of a semester, is due on December 15, at the end of the essay course. All the students like to socialize but hate to be overly stressed, and, conversely, they hate There are to write but like to get good grades. in other motivational differences elements, how ever. Betty finds good grades less im somewhat than Anne and Colin (i.e., she has a portant smaller need lower sense
and she has a for achievement), of self-efficacy (i.e., expectancy). Colin, however, desires good grades even more than Anne but is the most impulsive. in utility for these the changes Figure 4 maps three over the course of the semester regarding their choices between studying and socializing. In the early days of the semester, socializing's is temporally distant, while component negative
liked if any of the students ples. For instance, less, they would likely start writing socializing that self this highlights earlier. Importantly, regulatory failure occurs for a plethora of possi in self-efficacy, task aver bilities. Differences siveness,
and the proximity of impulsiveness, be temptations all can create similar observed we can diagnose root these havior. Unless causes the effec instead of just the symptoms, intervention must tiveness of any motivational typically be suboptimal.
is in the present. This its positive component These pa results in a high utility evaluation. for rameters are exactly opposite writing, giving it a low utility evaluation. By the end of the
APPLICATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF TMT

When we discussed we the advantages of an provide in a highlighted tegrative approach, fits. First, an integrative theory should three bene
2006 Steel and K?nig 901 common language among social scientists. Sec to complex and ond, it should be applicable realistic and situations, improving description it should the shar facilitate prediction. Finally, fields and, consequently, ing of insights among of novel and plausible the generation hypothe ses. TMT shows these advantages. are using the critical researchers Already, of TMT wide (see Figure 1) and how it is implicitly antici in many political insti and counteracted pated tutions. He states:
some
In the heat of passion

immediate from prudent as
or under the influence of

an formed individual in advance of a can or plans
temptation,
deviate uals,
do things he will
such
voters no
later regret. Groups

or members prone less
of individ
political irrational
components extremely example,
soil conversation, strategic military deterrence, risk behavior, and work project management, violence Laneri, (e.g., Barkley, Edwards, place Fletcher, & Metevia, 2002; Be 2001; Baumeister, 1996; Das & rejikian, 2002; Bleichrodt & Gafni, & 2001; 2005; Fred Paserman, Teng, DellaVigna erick et al, 2002; Glasner, 2003; Glomb, Steel, & Arvey, 2002; Hall & Fong, 2003; Krusell, Kuru??u, & Smith, 2000; Petry, 2001; Rachlin, 2000; Thaler, used 1991; Yesuf, 2003). Also, here we ourselves TMT to account for all the observed findings
dis prospect theory and temporal to addictive behav counting have been applied ior, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, con sumer behavior, health choices, job search,
to investigate topics from an of fields. For variety complex
behavior
assembly,
are
to such
(1992: 39-40).
is lim Part of this precommitment to so as to iting rules that we bind ourselves avoid later regrettable actions. Another precom is creating a bicameral mitment system, where decision making must pass through two cham the electorate, bers representing such as a con on the Or (JointCommittee gress and a senate of Congress, the 1993). Retelling ganization "saucer anecdote" of George Washington helps to illustrate the wisdom of this built-in delaying In a conversation mechanism. between Thomas Jefferson and Washington, Jefferson asked why a senate should be established. "Why," Wash
To deal with this inherent weakness, constitu are tions often drawn that enact forms of pre commitment.
discuss research indicat job design, reviewing are we that time and value factors. Third, ing consider stock market where both behavior, ap prospect theory and temporal discounting to in effect. Finally, we examine be pear goal setting, which TMT. potentially exhibits all aspects
of these diverse topics, we that TMT describes fundamen tal effects and that there are new or rarely con sidered In increasing levels of implications. we first with behavior, group complexity, begin it to emphasize both the importance of using can and that TMT be ap temporal discounting Second, we plied tomore than just individuals. For each review evidence
If the issue involves regarding procrastination. can be applied. choice, TMT apparently the advantages To further demonstrate of an we consider four addi integrative approach, tional areas.
"do you pour coffee into your ington responded, saucer?" "To cool it," Jefferson replied. "Even said. "We pour legislation into so," Washington saucer to cool it" (Farrand, 1966: the Senatorial countries the Senate second offer similar explanations. is often referred to as "the
359). Other In Canada, house
of
teract this trend, Haubrich the (2000) discusses use of policy rules and removing the central bank's discretion. The policy rules are inter a as of form similar to preted precommitment, as both lashing himself to the mast... and central banks] face tempta [government tions to act at a given moment in ways that run counter to their long-range (Haubrich, goals" "Ulysses
inflation merely to immediately and, thus, cause reduce unemployment (for a review see White, central bank may exces 1999). An unconstrained this sively exploit option, to the detriment of the health. To coun country's long-term economic
thought." is the this political Supplementing analysis issue of the central bank. Central are banks to times at increase the money supply tempted
of sober
Group
Behavior theo
individual-level Many decision-making are equally and biases ries, heuristics, for describing group behavior priate
appro (Pious, to be true of TMT. In an 1993). This also appears intriguing chapter, Elster (1992) examines pref erence reversal created by temporal discounting
2000: 1).
This model
in the management arena, However, team research has adopted a "punctuated librium" model, championed by Gersick suggests
most
equi (1991). that team performance is
902
Academy
of Management
Review
October
a useful
over time but demonstrates not hyperbolic sudden shift or discontinuity around the mid of a project. Although punctuated equilibrium
a life is
to evolutionary model and does appear and strate reflect some forms of organizational & Tushman, (e.g., Romanelli to better appears discounting
rebellion considerable satisfaction, causing when first implemented. Taylor himself was as "a soulless slave driver, out to characterized health and rob him of destroy the workingman's his manhood" 1997: 1), a vilification (Kanigel, that reached such an extent House of Representatives to investigate committee that in 1911 the U.S. a special his and other similar authorized
performance. Specifically, note and Giambatista Waller, Zellmer-Bruhn, in indicate a "curvilinear studies that several crease in the rate of performance of task perfor mance over allotted work time" (2002: 1047). In addition, we reanalyzed the published data from Gersick's Bordia, and (1989) and Chang, time statements, Duck's (2003) work on teams'
gic development 1994), hyperbolic describe group
first implemented (Taylor, 1911). has However, job simplification cannot always be increased Wages with usually goal
systems of management. job simpli Ultimately, fication was made palatable by vastly increas sometimes up to 100 percent when ing wages, its limits.
which are an indication of work pace. As shown in Figure 5, the cumulative number of time state ments was significantly curvilinear (p < .0001) in both cases, discounting reflecting hyperbolic as the deadline increases (i.e., work pace ap We expect that future research will proaches). find that the average group levels of impulsive ness will affect the degree of curvilinearity, sim for time ur obtained ilar to the results already & Carpenter, Gibson, (Waller, Conte, gency
in itself. Consequently, and improving motivation
work global competition), and diminished by job simplification, is a worthy satisfaction improving employees' theories satisfaction
(especially motivation is
focused on were de
Wall's several
veloped. Motivation-hygiene theory (Herzberg, 1966) and job characteristic theory (Hackman & Parker and Oldman, 1976) are two examples. (2001) review demonstrates of these theories aspects' confirmed, they were empirically that, despite failure to be still important that tasks can
2001).
Job Design
is intrinsically related to selection. Job design a person for the job, we of selecting Instead ef the for the person. Historically, redesign job on have forts to redesign focused simplifi jobs cation, as exemplified by Fredrick Taylor. Unfor have a strong tendency jobs tunately, Taylorized to improve performance at the cost of employee
emphasizing developments, to be rewarding and that indi be better shaped vidual differences will affect how rewarding these tasks will be. TMT indicates novel ways we can build on this past work. As the literature summarized we are not blank slates. We indicates, with definite tendencies. The challenge that is then becomes how to design a workplace commensurate with our motivational heritage. this would result in intrinsically plea Ideally, we would to do tasks?tasks choose surable even in the absence of financial compensation. As a step toward this goal, we should attempt to here come build our tendency to that recognize settings tasks that undervalue the future and to develop satisfy our basic needs. This has yet to be done. indi To begin with, hyperbolic discounting in frivolous but cates we are likely to indulge activities if they are easily enjoyable workplace
both
FIGURE 5
That Work Pace/Time Graph Demonstrating over the Course of a Group Project Statements Are Not Linear But Curvilinear, Reflecting Hyperbolic Discounting
Cumulative statements
time
obtainable. job design stud Presently, however, ies do not consider whether tempting but infe rior courses of actions are too readily available. the internet and email are almost For example, it is not and, consequently, instantly accessible, are also influential facilita that they surprising
Start ? Project time Finish
tors of work procrastination (Brackin, Ferguson, 2000; Lavoie & Pychyl, 2001; Skelly, & Chambliss,
2006 Steel and K?nig 903 Steel, in press), reducing productivity by billions of dollars Everton, & Jolton, 2002). (Mastrangelo, to these options could be delayed, even Ifaccess itwould be easier tomake for people modestly, use rational of them. shows similar ne job design re glect. We have an incomplete understanding tasks typically satisfy what de garding what we sires. Essentially, still must link what Needs-based in nature. Specifically, "investors seem to attach to short-run eco importance
Dunnette calls "the two worlds of human behav ioral taxonomies" chal (1976: 477), a perpetual our for field. Schmitt and Robertson (1990) lenge in virtu reflect that this goal has been repeated ally Wall review. Even Parker and every selection more in recent chapter on work their note, that of individual differ design, "knowledge ences as contingencies is scant" (2001: 96). As TMT result
to be an excellent it also appears of temporal discounting. the effect of bad news. Unlike antic Consider ipated problems, sudden and surprising news of in misfortune suggests an impending downturn perspective indication the stock price. The company value will dimin so will the value of the ish and, consequently, stock. Some selling is, of course, then rational, and a dip in price is to be expected. However, stockholders with a high discount function will
disproportionate nomic developments" 1991: 259). Al (Thaler, though De Bondt and Thaler interpret this effect and Tver primarily as an instance of Kahneman heuristic, from a TMT sky's (1979) representative
is not only the indicates, performance of having the appropriate motivational drive; itmust be stronger than other competing In any given drives. tasks job, its associated of an em may strongly satisfy all the needs or perhaps ployee only a few. The remaining needs must be met in other ways, perhaps by or daydream ineffective socializing, doodling, ing. Consequently, if strong needs the job's confines reviews when we design a job, deter are unlikely to be met becomes
overvalue this imminent loss and will oversell to minimize it. The stock price will plunge past it actually becomes the optimal point, to where more rational to buy, given its expected long
term performance. This overreaction is formally in the investment called exploited technique of the Dow" stock Also, 1991). "Dogs (O'Higgins, seem an to be programs repurchasing explicit to manage (Sanders sightedness such shareholder short & Carpenter, 2003).
attempt
mining within
tant. Previous
(1977) and Cantor that "rogue" needs

formance.
very impor and Green by Schneider and Blanton (1996) indicate can detrimentally affect per
Goal
Setting
Stock Market
Behavior
tional exuberance." most part, concluded risk averse,
ble of the late 1980s. More recently, in 1996, the Dow what Federal Reserve Jones displayed Board Chairperson Alan Greenspan called "irra Economists for the have, that investors do tend to be
is largely rational, but Stock market behavior not entirely. Schiller (2000) touches on several instances of this, such as the British South Sea of 1720 or the Japanese bubble real estate bub
new hypotheses two of its suggests regarding moderators: Im goal difficulty and proximity. cannot be these novel predictions portantly, on the basis of previous made to ex attempts 1998; goal setting (e.g., Carver & Scheier, & Slowik, 2004; Locke & Latham, 2002; Raynor & Entin, 1982). can be The effectiveness of goal setting two of TMT: the aspects largely explained by plain Fried
that goal setting is an extremely powerful (see Locke & Latham, 2002, fora recent technique it has its limitations, lacking, review). However, for example, "the issue of time perspective" 2004: 400). As we will show, (Locke & Latham, TMT can account for goal setting's effects and cates
One of the most widely used motivational the con ories within an industrial/organizational text is goal theory (Karoly, 1993), and for good reason. Extensive indi study unambiguously
in accordance with prospect theory it appears that the and, thus, TMT. However, to temporal dis stock market is also vulnerable
counting.
In a series of papers, De Bondt and Thaler (see research demonstrating Thaler, 1991) reviewed that the stock market, as well as stock market to unexpected overreact and dramatic analysts, news events, both favorable and disagreeable
more
of diminishing returns (see Figure 2) principle and (see Figure 1). Any temporal discounting into several division of a project smaller and to take ad immediate appears subgoals two of these As mentioned, elements. vantage
904 Academy
of Management
Review
October
perceived to a more visions
each for achievement, satisfy one's need mediate satiates. step also temporarily Impor can be completed tantly, these smaller subgoals them to be realized more sequentially, allowing
each valued subgoals, only slightly less whole. For example, that of the original of an entire project may though completion
a curvilinear relationship assessment. Substantial di objective of large goals may result in a series of value has than al best inter
FIGURE 6
Graph the Superiority of Goal Demonstrating Dominance Setting in Achieving Motivational over Tempting Alternatives 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
- Background temptations ? ?; No goal setting Goal setting
Utility
quickly. This state of affairs presents a potent motiva tional opportunity. Research has shown that the situations of affects decision parsing making. For example, Rachlin how gam (2000) discusses is influenced by whether people bling behavior consider a period of betting as several individ ual bets or as a single gambling session.6 By a large project into smaller goals, subdividing the sum whole
15
30
45
Time
60
75
90
of the parts can be greater than the Essen (to reverse a popular aphorism). increases the duration of mo tially, goal setting when tivational drive toward a dominance, of action
that is, background temptations as represented line in Figure 6. Here, by the straight dashed the project into three sub goal setting divides goals, each valued at 80 percent of the original. find that he or With goal setting, a person would be working toward the project for a she would
is likely to supercede competing in Figure effect 6, options?an exemplified a person to finish a where has ninety days toward a goal occur only if its project. Actions drive or utility exceeds that of other pursuits?
course
Latham and Although that proximity affects performance "additional information" by providing specific a supporting explana (1999: 422), TMT suggests tion: temporal discounting. Distal goals are sub of stantially delayed, reducing the effectiveness Seijts argue and value. expectancy should There be motivational tension be tween goal difficulty and proximity. By dividing a large goal into variously spaced subgoals, each to achieve and, may be easier subgoal there is thus, less satisfying. Consequently, where the further subdivi likely a breakpoint
increase
motivation.
it total of thirty days. Without setting, goal would be only fifteen. There are also several moderators that affect the effectiveness of goal setting. TMT makes the interplay be regarding specific hypotheses tween two of these: goal difficulty and goal proximity. goal TMT understood, increasing already to increase motivation. In tends difficulty Increased terms, this effect is due to value. As
its value more than can sion of a goal decreases be offset by the decrease in delay. Since TMT formalizes the relationship mathematically it should value, and delay, among expectancy, indicate where this breakpoint should best oc
cur.
individuals should be Specifically, impulsive more motivated It would be best by proximity. for them to have more frequent but smaller those with a higher need for goals. Conversely, will more likely attend to goal dif Their motivation should be maximized ficulty. by less frequent but harder goals. By attending to individual such as differences these, TMT strat should allow us to provide a goal-setting a to tailored rather than egy specific person, achievement us rely on general heuristics
itself (Eisen becoming secondary is proximity, other moderator The berger, 1992). since increasing the proximity of a goal tends to
arises from achieving the diffi than the easy 1997). Also, (Bandura, of challenging the achievement goals may be come associated with rewarding outcomes, thus self-satisfaction cult rather a reinforcer
making
(e.g., goal this should difficulty, proximity). Importantly, in goal-setting lead to a dramatic improvement the of duration power, increasing any goal's mo tivational
See
also
Dawes'
(1998) summary
of sunk
costs.
dominance. Of note, there are still other insights that TMT can provide for goal setting, further demonstrat
2006 Steel and K?nig 905 novel and plausible generate the of extremely presence hypotheses. Briefly, attractive alternatives (e.g., raising temptation's utility in Figure 6) can indicate when goal set ting will be less effective or ineffective. Also, if ing motivational for systems to then itmay be preferable gains, outcomes both the positive for suc emphasize a goal and the penalties for cessfully achieving losses and separate in is dominant losses or gains there are that it can cation and hypothesis it must be generation, in a va merit repeated
research should focus to what degree the in is signif cremental variance that TMT provides icant. We discuss this further below. there are a variety of methodologies Finally, can be con with which this future research ducted. We should venues that two additional suggest a computer be strongly considered: ized personal system of instruction and com also
generalizable, showing riety of situations. Future on evaluating when and
failure. Assessing which system an individual indicates whether should be stressed.
FUTURE RESEARCH
Aside from improving scientific communica tion and hypothesis there are sev generation, criteria and for eral qualitative quantitative evaluation (Myung, Pit, & Kim, 2004). A should plausibly observed find explain (i.e., reflect ings, it should be understandable it should be falsifiable established constructs),
these puter simulations. Although rarely used, venues have the advantage of potentially being more more complexity realistic and allowing while research control of key vari retaining are also Their nature and advantages ables. further reviewed below.
model model
Model
Testing:
Simplicity
Versus
Complexity
fulfills these standards. to focus on The strategy for integration was the most important and heavily validated parts of the motivational field. Its expectancy and value components have already been well as sessed researchers?more
its predictions and (i.e., may be validated), fit the observed should data of (i.e., "goodness fit"). TMT, by the very nature of its construction,
of model testing are extensive and the of scope any paper except a dedi beyond cated review (e.g., Myung et al., 2004; Navarro & the accurate 2005). Briefly, it requires Myung, measurement of the observed behavior, as well as the constructs that are thought to give rise to The details the behavior To (i.e., specified by the model). we measure to evaluate would need then TMT, performance, along with both individual and ex variables that reflect expectancy, perimental value, and delay forboth losses and gains. With this data, we could compare competing models using a choice of indices, ones taking into ac count both parsimony and completeness or Bayesian information criterion). results are again
cross-validation),
themselves have been studied for (1992). Needs the better part of a century (e.g., Murray, 1938; Winter et al., 1998). Consequently, TMT has al Also, adding ready been validated piecemeal. extra adjustable im will invariably parameters fit to some degree (Forster, 2000). TMT prove
by many recently by (1992). Its discounting Tversky and Kahneman function is the culmination of extensive and var as ied investigations, summarized by Ainslie
Akaike perior
sets izable.
(e.g., If su
obtained
in related data
is general
(i.e.,
the model
accounts the full TMT model for significantly more variance. it not enough is for Furthermore, to be rarely useful. If it is to the full TMT model have value beyond aiding scientific communi
of fitbut to do it parsimoniously. Con ev most model indices for sequently, penalize Akaike Information ery extra parameter (e.g., is not desir Criterion; AIC). Undue complexity to be formally shown that able, and it remains goodness
should account for any observed data better than any of its component theories. Still, there are two other standards to consider. Part of model development is not only to have
We do not expect that the full TMT model will as we be necessary, indicated consistently when discussing its hierarchical nature. How ever, it is difficult to argue why only a subset of the motivational fundamentals that compose TMT ever apply. Such a position is radical and a new scien unsupported, requiring postulating tific principle
ments should come into play. We already made the case that the full TMT model is necessary to as as a on well touched predict procrastination,
that prevents these fundamental ever in concert. Con from components operating situations for where there is sequently, complex an assortment of options, considered by a di verse sampling of people, more of TMT's ele
906 Academy
of Management
Review
October
wide
pared against. The more consumer behavior) and
it should be appli variety of topics where The incremental variance potentially pro vided by TMT will depend on what topic is being and what theory it is being com investigated cable.
variables models.
is still not complex enough. One refinement that to reconsider is the future research may want and avoidance A trichotomy duality. approach may be the more appropriate representation.
(e.g., ing model the should be. Naturally, greater TMT's value converse should also be true. that TMT occasionally It is possible, however,
the topic (e.g., complex the simpler the compet expected utility theory), the
models.
and use them to compare competing As the number of variables increases, there can be technical and administrative ob in gathering stacles the requisite data. In the two novel venues following section we consider can assist that testing and applying complex
New
Research
Venues
and "fighting spirit" (Olason mism, pessimism, & Roger, 2001). For impulsiveness, Cloninger model, with sepa (1987) posits a tridimensional
or negative side of the avoidance Specifically, our nature appears to be less than unitary. For research, optimism appears expectancy-related as three factors: opti to be better understood
There are a variety of methodologies that can to further study TMT and its implica be used tions. Traditional work on related concepts, es relied on com pecially temporal discounting,
(i.e., animal research) and parative psychology "casino" where and situations, expectancy in value were expressed explicitly, typically terms of ratios, dollars, and deaths. Unfortu these situations give a great nately, although deal of control, their limited realism and com
rate systems for gains (i.e., novelty seeking) and and a third sys for losses (i.e., harm avoidance), tem he calls "persistence." This three-factor so recent support received lution has (Torrubia, Molt?, & Caseras, 2001; Whiteside & Ly styles for
their generalizability (Ba suspect plexity makes we recommend zerman, 2001). Consequently, a com that two other venues also be considered: instruction of and system personal puterized computer simulations. traditional methodologies Since criticized as potentially unrealistic, a movement research have been
?vila, nam,
2001). Similarly, people's coping three comparable factors uncertainty yield emotional & 2001): (Greco uncertainty Roger, and for change desire (avoidance), (approach),
there has decision
been
toward naturalistic
recent neuropsy factor. Finally, of the presence reviews do indicate chological other systems (Gray & McNaughton, 1996; Lang, & 1997; Rothbart, Ahadi, Bradley, & Cuthbert, Evans, 2000), such as fight-or-flight. Also, differ internalizing ent brain
(persistence). cognitive uncertainty From a broader perspective, Raghunathan differences and Pham (1999) note substantive and of sadness the influences between anxiety on decision making. (1999), in Similarly, Krueger an examination found that of mental disorders, a three-factor model comorbidity. explained were best fear and anxiety-misery Specifically, a as two of subfactors understood high-order
making (K?hberger, Schulte-Mecklen & like to beck, Perner, 2002). Ideally, we would to TMT on a wide range test further refinements of people who are striving at their own pace toward an important goal in a standardized but realistic setting where we can precisely but eas their behavior. this is a Although ily measure there is at least one long list of specifications, venue all these fea that presently provides tures?a system of in personal computerized struction (C-PSI). or pro of instructions A personal system has been version in use for decades, has several desired
learning grammed but a computerized
the functions, which our motivational tend to employ separate ories ultimately model, as well as common components, truly making an fiction factors inevitable orthogonal (Damasio, is to deter the goal or too simple, it is an
1994). of whether Regardless mine ifTMT is too complex
As used by Steel, Brothen, and Wam qualities. of students bach simulta (2001), hundreds a university toward completing neously work course at their own pace, allowing choice and, behavior. Furthermore, progress thus, motivated at an unparalleled is assessed number of points as the course into numerous is broken down assignments administered all computer (e.g., seventy-eight), re with precisely completion and corded. Similarly, a host of other observed can be easily inserted into self-report measures
ap empirical matter and the same methodology the relevant plies. We must accurately measure
2006 Steel and K?nig 907 this framework. The only restriction is that stu dents must finish these assignments by the final exam. Consequently, it is a good venue for de are if all aspects of TMT for necessary termining of self the efficacy Similarly, prediction. on the TMT interventions based regulatory can be clearly evaluated in this setting. model commonalities. idating more progress rapidly by from different disciplines. one hand, the extremely Our science would
We can not only see the outcome but can exam ine in detail people's toward their progression if other Future should consider research goals. existing adapted Kanfer-Ackerman
function evident in behaviorist and discounting nature economic is of human understanding in other areas. In fact, most largely overlooked reviews fail to refer to it (e.g., Fran motivational Thi 1994; Kanfer, 1990; Kleinbeck, Quast, 1990; Mitchell, 1997). On the other erry, & Hacker, since at have maintained, hand, economists least Stigler and Becker (1977), that tastes or lit is, needs or traits?provide preferences?that ken,
the findings sharing on the For example, time well-supported
realistic research settings could also be to provide similar benefits (e.g., the Air Traffic Controller Task;
cf.
Kanfer & Ackerman, 1989). for TMT Another novel venue
to effectively model extremely complex phenom ena, such as global weather (Clauer et patterns nuclear physics al., 2000) and applied (Bigelow, 1995). Conse Moloney, Philpott, & Rothberg, to quently, this technology is also being applied recondite areas of human decision making, such as traffic (Pursula, 1999) and market behavior (Janssen & Jager, 2001), as well as several orga science nizational topics (Hulin, Miner, & Seitz, as Lauded the "Third Scientific Discipline" 2002).
is the research construction of computer simulations. Recent us in parallel advances computing are allowing
or explanation tle or no prediction of human behavior. During the 1970s, this was a plausible even within psychology and popular position, as Caplan 1973). However, (2003) (e.g., Mischel, our outlines, empirical findings over the last that it is increasingly quarter century indicate tomaintain outlandish such a belief. TMT addresses such dysfunctional separation from several
by unifying insights ories of motivation. definitive human model
behavior, framework of essential
Importantly, for every aspect of accounting but it does provide a common features. Using from individual it, the disci
different the this is not a
extensive
contributions
(Ilgen & Hulin, 2000), with the first two being it has and correlational research, experimental to open entirely new lines of study. the potential If consensus that TMT does indicates indeed of decision mak provide a good approximation
plines may be better shared by all, such as cog nitive psychology how expectan determining or the findings cies change with experience from the self-regulatory disciplines indicating how
such as compensation systems or incor job design. Already, a rudimentary model the notion of needs, satiation, and tem porating exists. It is the The Sims, the poral discounting most popular computer game of all time, based on the principles of consumer and evolutionary terventions, psychology (Johnson, 2002; Pearce, 2002).7
the foundation for a new ing, TMT will provide to of simulators that can be used generation in initially test a wide variety of motivational
may be tempered. As Barrick impulsiveness and Mount conclude, "In order for any field of to advance, science it is necessary to have an classification scheme for accumulat accepted
ing and categorizing empirical findings" (1991: can provide common ground to 23). This model enable the necessary dialog.
REFERENCES
Ainslie, G. 1992. Picoeconomics: motivational University The states successive of interaction strategic within the person. New Press. In discounting. over time: 57-92.
York: Cambridge
CONCLUSION
Although we have benefited by exploring hu man nature from many different perspectives, we would also gain by considering and consol
Ainslie, G. New
G.,
& Haslam,
Loewenstein York:
N. 1992. Hyperbolic & J.Elster (Eds.), Choice Russell Foundation. Sage behavior. Processes, and
I. 1991. A theory of planned Ajzen, Behavior and Human Decision Akerlof, G. A. Economic 1991. Procrastination Review, 81: 1-19.
Organizational 50: 179-211. American
obedience.
7 mist
For an Heath
interesting (2001), who choices
see the political econo application, used The Sims to simulate the effects conflict.
Albanese,
of lifestyle
on work-family
P. J. 1987. The nature of preferences: An explora tion of the relationship between economics and psychol 8: 3-18. ogy. Journal of Economic Psychology,
908 Academy Allport, G. W. York: Holt. Antonides, G. 1961. Paffern and growth in personality. and
of Management New
Review
October and unre
Some unanswered personality: questions issues. solved In R. S. Wyer, Jr.,& T. K. Srull
(Eds), Social
Dordrecht, Atkinson, taking Atkinson, Van Bandura, York: Bandura, J.W.
in economics 1991. Psychology Netherlands: Kluwer Academic. 1957. Motivational Psychological introduction
business.
determinants Review,
of
risk
and assessments of personality: intelligence cognitive in social cognition, Advances vol. 2: 93-109. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, New M. F. 1998. On the self-regulation Press. of
behavior.
64: 359-372. New York:
W. 1964. An J. Nostrand. A.
tomotivation.
behavior. Carver, &
York: Cambridge (Eds.), Handbook
University
C. S., & Scheier, S. J. Lopez London: S., Sutton,
1997. Self-efficacy: E. A.
The
exercise
of control.
New
231-243. Carver, C.
Freeman. A., & Locke, 2003. Negative self-efficacy Journal of Applied Psychology, and 88:
M. F. 2002. Optimism. In C. R. Snyder of positive psychology: Oxford University Press. S. K., & Scheier, M. F. 2000. Action, integra-; 26: 741?
goal effects 87-99. Berkley, via,
revisited.
emotion,
personality: Emerging conceptual tion. Personality and Social Bulletin, Psychology 751.
and
R. A., Edwards, L. 2001. Executive
G.,
Laneri,
M.,
Fletcher,
K., & Mete discount attention
sense of ing, and deficit hyperactivity defiant chology, dimensions sonnel Baumeister, failure, Journal Bazerman, Journal disorder 29: 541-556.
temporal functioning, time in adolescents with disorder Journal (ADHD) and
(ODD).
oppositional of Abnormal Child Psy Big Five personality A meta-analysis. Per
A., Bordia, P., & Duck, J. 2003. Punctuated Chang, equilibrium a new understanding and linear progression: of Toward of Management Journal, group development. Academy 46: 106-117. and delay of of R. J. 1967. Choice S., & Herrnstein, Chung, reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Behavior, Clauer, R. C. 10: 67-74. R., Gombosi, K. G., T. van L, De Leer, Zeeuw, B., Stout, D. Q. L., Ridley, F., Groth,
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, and
M. K.
1991. The
Analysis
job performance: 44: 1-26. Psychology, R. F. 2002. Yielding
impulse purchasing, of Consumer Behavior, M. H. 2001. The
to temptation: Self-control consumer and behavior. 28: 670-676.
J., Powell,
C. P. T., & Holzer, methods Transaction Cloninger, C.
applied on Plasma R. 1987. A
T. E. 2000. High performance computer to space weather simulations. IEEE Science, 28: 1931-1937. de Ar
of Behavioral
making. study of "real" decision 14: 353-384. Decision Making, Jour
J.D. Berejikian, nal of Peace Bernoulli, new 23-36. D.
2002. A cognitive theory of deterrence. 39: 165-183. Research, in 1738.) Exposition of risk. Econometrica,
for clinical systematic of personality variants. scription and classification 44: 573-588. chives of General Psychiatry, method R. W. Does 2001. Pursuing "naturalistic
(First published theory of the measurement
1954.
of a 22:
Cooksey, ence: 362. Cosmides,
hinder?
Journal
an integrated sci decision or decision making" help of Behavioral Decision 14: 361? Making,
M. J., Philpott, R., Moloney, J.,& Rothberg, J. 1995. Bigelow, The consor and particle Nuclear simulations: physics tium of upper-level software. New York: Wiley. physics Bleichrodt, counted nomics, Brackin, H., & Gafni, utility model 15: 49-67. A. 1996. Time health. and the dis preference, Eco Journal of Health
and L., & Tooby, J. 2000. Evolutionary psychology M. Haviland-Jones In M. Lewis & J. (Eds.), of emotions Handbook (2nd ed.): 91-115. New York: Guil the emotions. ford Press.
Damasio,
A. R.
1994. Descartes' brain. New York:
error: Emotion, Putnam.
reason,
and
the human 2000. tech Ur Das,
T., Ferguson, students' College
C. E., Skelly, B., & Chambliss, use of electronic communication Working paper,
Introverts versus extraverts. nology: sinus College, PA. Collegeville,
T. K., & Teng, B.-S. 2001. Strategic risk behavior and its risk propensity Between and decision temporalities: context. Journal of Management 28: 515-534. Studies, R. M. 1998. Behavioral psychology, vol. decision 2 ment. In D. T. Gilbert & S. T. Fiske and making judg (Eds.), The handbook 497-548. Boston,
Dawes, discounting. 2004. NJ:
A. L. 1999. Addiction and Bretteville-Jensen, 18: 393-407. Economics, Journal of Health Camerer, C. F., Loewenstein, in behavioral University H. Press. G., & Rabin, M.
of social (Eds.). McGraw-Hill. DellaVigna, patience. Dollard,
(4th ed.):
Advances Princeton Cantor,
economics.
Princeton,
S., & Paserman, Journal
M. D.
2005.
Job search
and
im
of Labor
Economics,
23: 527-588.
N., & Blanton, in daily
goals The psychology tion to behavior: Caplan, B. 2003.
life. In P. M. Gollwitzer 338-359. New
of personal 1996. Effortful pursuit & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), of action: Linking and motiva cognition York: Guilford Press. Why mean versus
N. E. 1950. Personality and psychother J.,& Miller, in terms of learning, apy: An analysis thinking, and culture. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Donovan, D.
are scientifically preference-based explanations Journal of Economic important. ingful and empirically Behavior and Organization, 50: 391-405. C. S? & Scheier, M. F. 1989. Social intelligence
Stigler-Becker
Myers-Briggs:
motivation. In N. Anderson, J. J. 2001. Work H. K. Sinangil, S. Ones, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, vol. 2: 53-76. P. F. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. New York: 1954. The practice & Row. of management.
Drucker,
Carver,
and
Harper
2006 Steel and K?nig 909

Dunnette, M. M. D. 1976. Aptitudes, (Ed.), Handbook 473-520. abilities, Chicago: and Rand skill. and orga McNally. In and stab wounds: Antecedents, and consequences, and aggression. (Eds.), Frontiers Emotions im In and
D. Dunnette
of industrial
nizational Eisenberger, Review, Eisenhardt, making. Elliot, A. vation aments
psychology: R. 1992. Learned 99: 248-267.
of workplace violence plications R. Lord, R. Klimoski, & R. Kanfer dustrial work: Gollwitzer, action: 287and 227-259. P. M. organizational San Francisco: 1996. The
of in
industriousness.
Psychological
psychology: Jossey-Bass.
K. M., & Zbaracki, Strategic
M.
Management T. M.
decision J. 1992. Strategic 13: 17-37. Journal, moti temper and Social
In P. M. Gollwitzer
J.,& Thrash,
in personality: and goals.
2002. Approach-avoidance and avoidance Approach of Personality
Linking 312. New York: Guilford
volitional benefits from planning. of & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology to motivation and behavior: cognition Press. of on of
Journal
Psychology, Elster, G.
82: 804-818. thought. In time: 35-53.
choice and political J. 1992. Intertemporal over Loewenstein & J.Elster (Eds.), Choice York: Russell Sage Foundation.
N. 1996. The neuropsychology J.A., & McNaughton, Gray, In D. A. Hope (Ed.), Perspectives anxiety: Reprise. fear: 61-134. Lincoln: and anxiety, panic, University Nebraska Greco, Press.
New
in E. J. 1985. Person-situation debate S., & O'Brien, Epstein, historical and current perspective. Bulle Psychological tin, 98: 513-537. Farrand, M. (Ed.) Haven, T. 1966. Records CT: Yale of the federal University Press. on 1860.) Elements New of convention, vol.
with uncertainty: The V., & Roger, D. 2001. Coping of a new measure. Person construction and validation and Individual Differences, E. amount 31: 519-534. 1997. Rate of temporal Memory
ality Green,
L., Myerson,
& McFadden, J., with 25: 715-723. G. R. of a
3. New Fechner, G.
discounting & Cognition, Hackman,
decreases
of reward.
1966.
(First published (Translated by H.
J.R., & Oldham, Test
1976. Motivation
psychophysics. Holt, Rinehart Fennema,
E. Adler.)
York: Hall,
& Winston. P.
of work: design ior and Human
theory. Organizational 16: 250-279. Performance,
through the Behav
and cumulative 1997. Original differences. of empirical prospect theory: A discussion 10: 53-64. Decision Journal of Behavioral Making, I. 1930. The theory of interest. New in model Journal York: Macmillan. selection: Perfor
H., & Wakker,
P. A., & Fong, G. T. 2003. The effects of a brief time intervention for increasing perspective activity physical 18: 685 and Health, among young adults. Psychology 706.
Fisher,
Forster, M. R. 2000. Key concepts mance and generalizability. Psychology, Franken, Grove, Frederick, R. E. 44: 205-231. 1994. Human Brooks/Cole.
Haubrich, Federal Heath,
J. G.
of Mathematical
Reserve
for policy 2000. Waiting Bank of Cleveland. society. Toronto:
rules.
Cleveland:
J. 2001. The efficient
Penguin
Books.
motivation
(3rd ed.).
Pacific
Herrnstein, Review, Herzberg, World. Ho, M.-Y.,
R. J. 1979. Derivatives 86: 486-495. F. 1966. Work and
of matching.
Psychological
CA:
S., Loewenstein, and
discounting nal of Economic Fried, Y., & Slowik, time: An
T. 2002. Time G., & O'Donoghue, A critical review. Jour time preference: 40: 351-401. Literature, goal-setting Academy mind. theory of Man
nature
of man.
Cleveland:
L. H. 2004. Enriching
with
agement
integrated approach. 29: 404-422. Review, 1986. The economic
T. J., Bradshaw, C. M., & S., Chiang, in quantitative 1999. Theory and method of "impulsive choice" behavior: analysis Implications for psychopharmacology. 146: Psychopharmacology, Mobini, E. Szabadi, 362-372.
Furnham, A., & Lewis, A. Press. St. Martin's
New
York:
Hulin, C time: Predictable of Management transitions Journal, 33:
C. J.G. 1989. Marking Gersick, in task groups. Academy 274-309. Gersick, C. G. J.
A. G., & Seitz, S. T. 2002. Computational Miner, in organizational sciences: of a Contributions modelling third discipline. In F. Drasgow & N. Schmitt (Eds.), Mea suring vances and analysing in measurement Jossey-Bass. of behavior. New York: Appleton behaviour and data analysis: in organizations: 498-533. Ad San
theories: A mul 1991. Revolutionary change tilevel exploration of the punctuated para equilibrium of Management 16: 10-37. Review, digm. Academy L. A., Bickel, W. K., Loewenstein, G., Jacobs, depri out Psycho role of E. A., Marsch, vation patients L., & Badger, G. J. 2002. Mild opioid the degree increases that opioid-dependent discount heroin delayed 163: 174-182. and and money.
Francisco: Hull, C.
L. 1943. Principles
Giordano,
Century-Crofts. Hunton, J.E., Hall, T. W., & Price, K. H. decision making. 1998. The value Journal of voice Psy
in participative chology,
of Applied
83: 788-797. L. (Eds.). 2000. Computational mod in organizations: The third scientific American DC: Washington, Psychological C.
pharmacology, Glasner, dictive book Wiley. Glomb, T., Steel, S. V. incentive
2003. Motivation
addiction:
The
Ilgen, D. R., & Hulin, eling of behavior discipline. Association.
in understanding and processes InW. M. Cox & E. Klinger disorders. 29-47. of motivational counseling: P., & Arvey, R. 2002. Office
treating ad (Eds.), Hand New York:
Ito, T. A., & Cacioppo,
J. T.
1999. The
sneers,
snipes,
In D. utility appraisals. N. Schwartz (Eds.), Well-being:
Kahneman,
psychophysiology E. Diener, ofhedon
of &
The foundations
910 Academy ic psychology: tion. 470-488. New York: Russell Sage
of Management Langley,
Review
October
Founda
habits and chang Janssen, M. A., & Jager, W. 2001. Fashions, of psychological factors af Simulation ing preferences: Journal of Economic dynamics. Psychol fecting market ogy, Johnson, 22: 745-772. S. 2002. Wild things. Wired Magazine, http://
A., Mintzberg, H., Pitcher, P., Posada, E., & Saint The view J. 1995. Opening up decision Macary, making: from the black stool. Organization 6: 260-279. Science, R. P. role 1993. Motivational of self-protection. factors in decision theories: 113:
Larrick, The
Psychological
Bulletin,
440-450. Latham, G. P., & Seijts, G. H. 1999. The effects of proximal and on performance on a moderately goals complex task. Journal of Organizational 20: 421-429. Behavior,
www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.03/aigames_pr.html, accessed 26, 2003. May Joint Committee cameral report of the Organization of Congress. 1993. Bi Final and interchamber cooperation. on the Organization of the Joint Committee ac on
distal
Lavoie,
relations
and the J.A. A., & Pychyl, T. A. 2001. Cyberslacking A of web-based survey procrastination superhighway: emotion. online and Social attitudes, procrastination, Computer Review, 19: 431-444. Scholl, R. W. 1999. Work pro
Congress, http://www.house.gov/archives/jcoc2.htm, cessed May 20, 2003.
Science Leonard, cesses. Levy, J. S.
N. H., Beauvais, The Human 1992. An
L. L., &
to of personality Judge, T. A., & Hies, R. 2002. Relationship review. motivation: A Jour meta-analytic performance 87: 797-807. nal of Applied Psychology, Kahneman, ysis Kanfer, D., & Tversky, A. 1979. Prospect theory: An anal 47: 263-291. risk. Econometrica, of decision under R. 1990. Motivation
motivation:
of self-concept-based incorporation 52: 969-998. Relations, introduction to prospect
theory. Political
Psychology, Locke, E. A., &
13: 171-186.
In M. Dunnette & theory. L. Houghs of industrial and organiza (Eds.), Handbook vol. 1 (2nd ed.): 124-151. Palo Alto, CA: tional psychology, Press. Consulting Psychologists R., & Ackerman, An and cognitive P. L. 1989. Motivation interaction integrative/aptitude-treatment of Applied to skill acquisition. Journal Psy 74: 657-690. skills self-regulatory In interference. cognitive & B. R. Sarason (Eds.), Cog 153? and findings: Theories, methods, Erlbaum Associates. Winslow Taylor Press. systems P. L. 1996. A
useful year Locke,
a practically G. P. 2002. Building Latham, A 35 task motivation: setting and theory of goal 57: 705-717. American odyssey. Psychologist, G. P. 2004. What of Management should we do about
E. A., & Latham,
motivation 403. Loewenstein, G.
theory? Six
recommendations
Kanfer,
first century. Academy
for the twenty 29: 388 Review,
abilities: approach chology, Kanfer,
1992. The
fall and
R., & Ackerman,
in the economics explanations In G. Loewenstein & J. Elster 3-34. New Loewenstein, behavior. Processes, Loewenstein, York: York: G. Russell Sage
rise of psychological choice. of intertemporal over time: (Eds.), Choice
perspective I. G. Sarason, nitive 171. Mahwah, Kanigel, and R.
to reducing G. R. Pierce, NJ: Lawrence
Foundation. Visceral influences Decision on
interference:
1996. Out
of control: Behavior
Organizational 65: 272-292. G., & Elster,
and Human
1997. The one best way: of efficiency. the enigma
Frederick New
York: Viking
J. 1992. Choice
over
time. New
Russell
Sage Evidence
Foundation. D. and Sage M. in a 1992. Anomalies an in intertempo In G. Loe interpretation. over time: 119-145. Choice
A P. 1993. Mechanisms of self-regulation: Karoly, 44: 23-52. view. Annual of Psychology, Review Klein, H. J. 1989. An integrated control theory model motivation. of Management Review, Academy 172. Kleinbeck, H.-H., Thierry, U., Quast, 1990. Work motivation. Hillsdale, H., & Hacker, NJ: Lawrence
Loewenstein, ral choice: wenstein New
G., & Prelec, & J. Elster
of work 14: 150?
(Eds.),
York:
Russell
Foundation. L., Pe?a-Correal, self-control T. E., & Mauro,
H.
(Eds.).
Logue, A. W., Rodriguez, B. C. 1984. Choice cation Experimental
Erlbaum
of experience-based Analysis
Quantifi paradigm: differences. Journal of the 41: 53-67. on Perspectives Annual Review
Associates. Krueger, ders. Archives Krusell, R. F. 1999. The structure of common mental disor
of Behavior, and
of General
Psychiatry, A. A.
56: 921-926. policy with Economic
Lopes, L. L. 1994. Psychology and risk, cooperation, of Psychology, Luce, R. D. alences 45:
economics:
P., Kurus?u, 14(3): A.,
B., & Smith, discounting. 1-40.
2000. Tax
the marketplace. 197-227. versus plausible
quasi-geometric Journal, K?hberger,
International
1990. Rational in preference
accounting
judgments.
Psychological
equiv Science,
Schulte-Mecklenbeck,
M.,
& Perner,
J. 2002.
1: 225-234. Madden, G. J.,Petry, N. M., Badger, G. J.,& Bickel, W. K. 1997. in opioid-dependent choices and self-control and non-drug-using control patients: Drug and rewards. Experimental 5: 256-262. and Clinical Psycho
decisions: and real. Organiza Framing Hypothetical Decision and Human 89:1162 Processes, tional Behavior 1175. Lang, B. N. P. J.,Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, and action. attention: Affect, activation, (Eds.), Attention and processes: Associates. 97-135. Mahwah, 1997. Motivated In P. J. Lang & and Sensory NJ: Lawrence
Impulsive patients monetary
pharmacology,
R. F. Simons motivational Erlbaum
orienting:
A. 2002. Exploring P. M., Everton, W., & Jolton, J. Mastrangelo, use of counterproductive facets and correlates computer at work. Poster session at the annual meeting presented

of the Society Toronto. Mazur, J. E. 1987. An adjusting In M. reinforcement. for studying de procedure L. Commons & J. E. Mazur events on and of intervening of behavior, Associ of Industrial Organizational Psychology, Olason, and D. T., & Roger, D. 2001. Optimism, pessimism, to assessing expec "fighting spirit": A new approach Differ and Individual tancy and adaptation. Personality ences, 31: 755-768. P. 1996. The relation between European temperament Journal of
layed (Eds.), vol. ates. Mazur,
The
reinforcement
effect of delay value: Quantitative Hillsdale,
Ostaszewski, and
5: 55-73.
analyses Erlbaum NJ: Lawrence
rate of temporal discounting. 10: 161-172. Personality, Ostaszewski, P. 1997. Temperament
J. E.
1998. Procrastination response
by
pigeons
with
fixed
interval mental Mazur, 112. McClelland, 825.
Analysis
Journal requirements. of Behavior, 69: 185-197. value addition
of the Experi
of the discounting and Euro rewards: probabilistic Conjoining traditions. European pean and American psychological 2: 35-43. Psychologist, delayed and
J. E.
models
2001. Hyperbolic of animal choice.
and
Psychological
Review,
general 108: 96
Parker,
from T. D. 2001. Work design: S. K? & Wall, Learning a new terrain. In N. Anderson, the past and mapping D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), of industrial, work and Volume chology. sand Oaks, CA: 1: Personnel Sage. battlebots, automata cellular god 2. http://www.gamestudies.org/0102/ 27, 2003. May gamblers, discount with delayed and and psychology: organizational 90-109. psy Thou
D. C.
1985. How people
motives,
skills,
and
values
de
Handbook
termine what
do. American
Psychologist,
40: 812?
F. K., & Swindell, S. McSweeney, ories of motivation revisited: Psychological Meilers, and Bulletin,
the 1999. General-process The role of habituation.
Pearce,
C.
2002. Sims, Studies, accessed
go. Game pearce/,
125: 437-457. A. D. J. 1998. Judgment of Psychology, 49:
B. A., Schwartz, decision making.
A., & Cooke, Annual
Review
Petry, N. M. 2001. Pathological substance abuse disorders, high 487. Pinker, rates. Journal
without at 110: 482
rewards
of Abnormal
447-477. Mischel, W. 1973. Toward a cognitive recon social learning of personality. 80: Review, Psychological
Psychology,
S. 2002. The blank New York:
slate:
The modern
denial
of human
ceptualization 252-283. Mischel, W.,
nature. Plott, C. R.
Penguin. choice 59: 301-327. of judgment University and Press. decision making. in experimental markets.
1986. Rational of Business,
& Shoda,
Y.
processing The ality:
dynamics
1999. Integrating within a unified
and dispositions of person theory
Journal Pious, S.
In system. personality cognitive-affective of personality: L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook (2nd ed.): 197-218. New York: Guil Theory and research ford Press. or Be
1993. Psychology Temple
Philadelphia: Pursula, M.
1999. Simulation of Geographic 1-8.
Journal sis, 3(1): Rachlin,
Information
of traffic systems: An overview. and Decision Analy of self-control. MA:
Mitchell,
1997. Matching contexts. ganizational 19: 57-149. J.,& Ainslie, G.
T.
motivational Research
strategies in Organizational
with
H. 2000. The science University Press.
Cambridge,
havior Monterosso,
Harvard Raghunathan, not equal: ness Human
Pos 1999. Beyond discounting: of impulse models control. Psycho sible experimental 146: 339-347. pharmacology, in personality. New York:
moods R., & Pham, M. T. 1999. All negative of anxiety Motivational influences and making. Organizational 79: 56-77. Processes, Behavior
are sad and
on decision Decision
H. A. 1938. Explorations Murray, Press. Oxford University Myerson, wards: J., & Green, Models Analysis L.
of individual
re 1995. Discounting of delayed choice. Journal of the Ex 64: 263-276. 2004. Model Lambert & 422-436. evaluation, R. Goldstone Thousand
as motivation O., & Entin, E. E. 1982. Achievement J. Raynor, a determinant in contingent of persistence and noncon In J.O. Raynor & E. E. Entin (Eds.), Moti tingent paths. vation, DC: Richards, career striving, and aging: 83-92. Washington, Hemisphere.
perimental Myung,
of Behavior,
I. J., Pitt, M. and The CA: D.
A., & Kim, W. In K.
testing (Eds.), Oaks, Navarro,
selection. handbook Sage.
of cognition:
S. H., & de Wit, H. 1999. L., Mitchell, J. B., Zhang, or probability in a model of impulsive Delay discounting behavior: Effect of alcohol. Journal of the Experimental of Behavior, 71: 121-143. Analysis E., & Tushman, as punctuated of Management K., Ahadi, M. L. 1994. Organizational An empirical Journal, 37: 1141-1166. trans test.
I. J. 2005. Model evaluation J., & Myung, In B. Everitt & D. Howel selection. (Eds.), Encyclopedia vol. 3: 1239-1242. behavioral statistics, Chichester,
and of UK:
Romanelli, Academy Rothbart, M.
formation
equilibrium:
Wiley. C, J. Naylor, behavior O'Higgins, lins. M. Pritchard, R. D., & Ilgen, D. R. 1980. A New York: Academic New theory of Press. Col
S. A., & Evans, Origins and Psychology, learning and
ment
in organizations. 1991. Beating
personality: and Social Personality J. B. 1954. Social Prentice-Hall. York:
and
D. E. 2000. Tempera outcomes. Journal of 78: 123-135. psychology.
the Dow.
York: Harper
Rotter, New
clinical
912
Academy
of Management
Review
October vol. 2:10-35. about psychology, of Minnesota Press. economics. New York: Rus
Sanders,
W. G., & Carpenter, M. A. 2003. Strategic satisfy on stock repur agency perspective ing? A behavioral announcements. of Manage program chasing Academy Journal, 46: 160-178. A review Science, of motivation 12: 211-277. Princeton, NJ: in
ti (Eds.), Thinking Minneapolis: Thaler, sell Thaler, R. H. Sage R. H.
clearly
University 1991. Quasi Foundation.
ment
rational
T. 2000. Artificial motives: Savage, creatures. artificial Connection Schiller, R. J. 2000. Irrational Press.
1992. The winner's Press. C, Molt?,
curse.
Princeton,
NJ: Prince
ton University Torrubia, R., ?vila,
exuberance.
J., & Caseras, and
X.
2001.
The
Princeton Schmitt,
University
sensitivity selection. Annual
N? & Robertson, of Psychology, F. W., & Green, and
I. 1990. Personnel 41: 289-319. J.E. 1977. The
Review Schneider, and
questionnaire and impulsivity 31: 837-862. Differences, Trope, Y., & Liberman, Review,
to punishment as (SPSRQ)
to reward sensitivity a measure of Gray's anxiety dimensions. and Individual Personality
need
for affiliation
sex as moderators
for achievement School Psychology,
between of the relationship need of academic Journal performance. 15: 269-277.
N. 2003. Temporal 110: 403-421.
construal.
Psycho
logical Tversky,
H. C, & Groenewoud, J.T. 1997. Studieplan Schouwenburg, voor Studenten ning: Ein werkboek [Study planning: for students]. Netherlands: workbook Groningen, Wolters-Noordhoff. Schwartz, B. 1989. Psychology York: Norton. the neural E. Diener, of learning and behavior
in prospect D. 1992. Advances A., & Kahneman, of uncertainty. Jour theory: Cumulative representation nal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5: 297-323.
Vancouver,
(3rd Van
ed.). New P. Shizgal, cations D.
A. A. 2001. The C. M., & Williams, J.B., Thompson, among signs in the relationships self-efficacy, and performance. of Applied Journal personal goals, 86: 605-620. Psychology, changing Eerde, W., els and of Applied & Thierry, work-related Psychology, 1964. Work J., Conte, on H. mod expectancy A meta-analysis. Journal 81: 575-586. New C. York: Wiley. 1996. Vroom's
1999. On
from studies
of utility: Impli computation In of brain stimulation reward. & N. Schwartz (Eds.), Well 500-524. of hedonic Foundation. model of rational choice.
criteria:
Kahneman,
The foundations being: New York: Russell Sage Simon, H. A.
psychology:
Vroom, Waller,
V. H. M.
and motivation. J. M., Gibson,
1955. A behavioral Journal of Economics,
M. A. 2001. The lines Review,
effect of individual
Quarterly Skinner, E. A.
69: 88-118. of control. 71: 549-570. The contrast of Political between Econom Journal of
team performance. 26: 586-600.
Carpenter, of dead perceptions of Management Academy
B., &
Personality Smith, V. L.
1996. A guide and Social 1991. Rational and
to constructs Psychology, choice:
Waller,
M.
J.,Zellmer-Bruhn,
M. E., & Giambatista, behavior pacing of Management
R. C. under
2002. dy 45:
economics
psychology.
Journal
the clock: Group Watching namic deadlines. Academy 1046-1055. W?rneryd, K. E. InW. 1988. Economic G. M.
Journal,
ics, 99: 877-897. Staats, new requires psychology and a research structure, agenda. theory, method, view of General 3: 3-13. Psychology, A. W. 1999. Unifying P. In press. and The nature infra .Re
F. Raaij, study. eryd (Eds.), Handbook ton: Kluwer Weiner, B. Academic.
psychology van Veldhoven,
as
field
of
& K. E. W?rn 3-38. Bos
of economic
psychology:
Steel,
analytic
theoretical
regulatory Steel,
failure.
A meta of procrastination: review of quintessential self Bulletin. Psychological C. 2001. Procrastination Personality
tion. Journal Weiner, B.
of motivational in educa 1990. History research of Educational 3: 616-622. Psychology, 1991. Metaphors Psychologist, 1999. The Blackwell. D. R. 2001. The a structural five factor model and of personality Individual in motivation 46: 921-930. institutions. Mai and attribution.
P., Brothen, and
T., & Wambach,
American White, Its L. H.
and Steele,
and mood. performance, personality, Individual 30: 95-106. Differences, C. M., & Josephs, dangerous R. A. 1990: Alcoholic American
theory of monetary
den, MA: myopia: Psychologist, Whiteside, and
and prized 45: 921-933. Steers,
effects.
S. P., & Lynam, Using
impulsivity: to understand
model
D. L. 2004. The future R. T., & Shapiro, R. M., Mowday, motivation of Management theory. Academy 29: 379-387. Review, of work
Differences, Wilson, E. O.
impulsivity. 30: 669-689.
Personality
1998. Consilience:
The unity of knowledge.
New
York: Winter,
Knopf. 1996. Personality: Analysis York: McGraw-Hill. John, O. L. E. Review, P., Stewart, A. and interpretation of
non est disputan Stigler, G., & Becker, G. 1977. De gustibus Economic 67: 76-90. dum. American Review, 1911. The principles Taylor, F. W. & Brothers. New York: Harper Tellegen, A. 1991. Personality assessment. of scientific management.
D. G.
lives. New Winter, ev D. G.,
Klohnen, J.# Towards research.
E. C, an Psycho
& inte
Duncan, Issues of definition, & D. Chicchet gration logical
1998. Traits
and motives:
traits:
of two traditions
idence,
and
In W. M. Grove
in personality 105: 230-250.

Yesuf, M. 2003. Attitude measures towards risk and rate of Pa on Zeidner, M., Boekaerts, Directions and M., & Pintrich, P. R. 2000. Self-regulation: for future research. InM. Boek New Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook York: Academic Press. of self
time preference: per presented the Ethiopian
evidence Experimental at the First International Economy, Addis Ababa,
in Ethiopia. Conference Ethiopia.
challenges aerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. regulation: 749-768.
at the Uni is an assistant (Piers.Steel@Haskayne.Ucalgary.ca) professor He his from the Ph.D. of School of Business. received versity Haskayne Calgary's of Minnesota's program. He continues industrial/organizational psychology University as well as synthetic validity, a half-century-old to research endeavor procrastination Piers Steel to create Cornelius and a universal and automated selection system.
in the work is a faculty member J.K?nig (c.koenig@psychologie.unizh.ch) Institut, Universit?t Z?rich, group at Psychologisches organizational psychology in psychology his Ph.D. from Philipps-Universit?t He received Switzerland. Marburg, time management, include His research interests multitasking, personnel Germany. selection, and job insecurity.

Integrating Theories of Motivation

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Integrating Theories of Motivation

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Integrating Theories of Motivation Author(s): Piers Steel and Cornelius J. Knig Source: The Academy of Management Review, Vol.

Academy o?Management Review 2006,Vol. 31,No. 4, 889-913.

THEORIES OF MOTIVATION INTEGRATING

Barrick & Mount, 1991; Elliot & Thrash, 2002;

stroyers of each other (1930: 312).

We Mannix, ers' passing

that the editor

produced Also, we a long chain

for this present we agreements, cause.

THE CASE FOR INTEGRATION

the applica identify four

employing this model of must strike a

been some economics.

as well as of our moti:

Zeidner, Boekaerts, jor reason for this decline

to the next (1998: 182). Wilson ences notes, advance

the basic since delay ered at average

into even 1979)?

Low Now Time Future t2

discounting, changing crossing established

= e-r(T-i)Value example, Utility & stein, 2002). O'Donoghue, For

rate refers perception. Similarly, lead to rewards that actions quency

and value in the form of to encapsu begins final equation

= Expectancy X Value utilit* + nr-o? ?z

transformation and gains.

differ for losses of probability the utility of expected Consequently,

ker (1997) and, of course, Tversky and Kahneman

Theory of the earlier

3 Mathematically, create expectancy notably ticeable similar

reflecting logarithmic law (1966) describing

monalities lished hensive

and well-estab In a compre

McClelland (1985)and Dollard and Miller (1950).

also Savage invaluable proven tional states,

and Swindell McSweeney role that need theory may

that this in rates for dif

7 + , r+,T _ A z r+(r -1)

in picoeco Being on the

0.2 0 ?i-1-1-1? 0.2

in two primary ploy a version assumes which garding bilities

der which This

limitations tive employment. At the highest all

level of complexity the previous theories

to variables related task self-efficacy, difficulty),

From a TMT per

APPLICATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF TMT

In the heat of passion

or under the influence of

later regret. Groups

components extremely example,

to investigate topics from an of fields. For variety complex

359). Other In Canada, house

equi (1991). that team performance is

gic development 1994), hyperbolic describe group

in itself. Consequently, and improving motivation

(1977) and Cantor that "rogue" needs

tional exuberance." most part, concluded risk averse,

perceived to a more visions

generalizable, showing riety of situations. Future on evaluating when and

failure. Assessing which system an individual indicates whether should be stressed.

pared against. The more consumer behavior) and

there has decision

learning grammed but a computerized

1994). of whether Regardless mine ifTMT is too complex