1

©Eva Dreikurs Ferguson, 2008

No parts of this paper may be reproduced without the Author’s permission.

MOTIVATION FROM THE ADLERIAN PERSPECTIVE

IAIP Congress August 1, 2008 in Vilnius, Lithuania
Eva Dreikurs Ferguson, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
Edwardsville, Illinois, USA

Adlerian Psychology was developed at a time when a largely mechanistic and

biological emphasis prevailed. Psychology as a whole was in its infancy when Adler
presented his socio-teleological and holistic psychology in the first two decades of the
20th Century. At that time, his theory and its methods were not well understood, not
adequately appreciated, and his impact on the developing discipline of psychology was
minimal compared to the more biological and mechanistic theory of Freud.
The intervening years since Adler first put forth his theory have seen a dramatic
change in the society-at-large as well as within the ever evolving discipline of
psychology. The present paper reviews some of the changes in society and in the
discipline of psychology that helped to make the ideas of Adler and Dreikurs far more
accepted today than ever before.
Positive Psychology
Research in the last 15 years has changed fundamental assumptions in psychology.
Important developments in modern psychology have moved the field closer to the
formulations of Adler and Dreikurs. Not long ago there was an emphasis on
mechanisms and biology as the basis for emotion, thought, motivation. However, the
growing fields of social psychology and social neuroscience have focused on processes
close to Individual Psychology. Studies of the brain no longer focus mainly on
pathology but on normal human functioning for memory, motivation, emotion, decision
making and choices, and on a host of social processes.
 2

An important example of how contemporary society and modern psychology has

moved closer to Adlerian psychology is seen in the Positive Psychology movement
(Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005;
Seligman, Rashid, & Parks, 2006). In the literature on positive psychology, the
emphasis is on human potential and how positive expectations and emotions benefit
human functioning. This is the core approach of Adlerian psychology and was
developed by Adler and his colleagues over 90 years ago. Unfortunately, major
researchers and writers in the positive psychology literature are either unaware of Adler
and Dreikurs’ contributions or for other reasons fail to credit the way Adlerians asserted
positive psychology in the early part of the 20th Century, long before the modern
articulation of the positive psychology approaches.
The Need to Belong is Based on Human Species Characteristics
General society and psychology as a discipline have not caught up with Adler and
Dreikurs (Ferguson, 2000, 2001), yet many developments give significant support to
Adlerian psychology. A notable example is the literature on the Need to Belong
(Baumeister, & Leary, 1995; MacDonald & Leary, 2005). The growing literature on the
need to belong increasingly recognizes that social relationships help define one’s sense
of self and one’s sense of adequacy (Leary & Cox, 2008). The position taken by
contemporary social psychologists is exactly that of Adler: The need to belong is part of
the evolution of the human species (Ferguson, 1989).
Many studies are showing that ostracism is harmful at various levels. The research
is done without the investigators giving recognition to Adler’s profound understanding
of the need to belong in the early part of the 20th Century, but clearly their work
supports what Adlerians have long known. Being isolated, not included, is an extremely
disturbing experience, and contemporary research has made clear that it is represented
in the brain in a way that is comparable to physical pain (Eisenberger, Lieberman, &
Williams, 2003).
 3

What is Meant by Motivation?

I am focusing on the construct of MOTIVATION in this presentation, in part
because that is unique in Adler’s theory. Motivation is a key concept in all dynamic
theories of personality, but the Adlerians conceptualize it in a way that still remains as a
pace setter for society and for psychology.
The concept of motivation focuses on energy and direction (Ferguson, 2003) . In
modern psychology, motivation is said to involve ‘action tendencies’ (Frijda,
Kuipers, &Ter Schure, 1989). Motivation leads to action. Motivation energizes, and
most contemporary psychologists take the view that goals give direction to the action
tendency. Adlerians have emphasized two aspects: The kinds of goals a person sets
that provide the energy for action, and the many practices that lead to sustained and
effective motivation. In this regard, the literature on encouragement and
discouragement by Adlerians is vital (Dinkmeye & Dreikurs, 2000; Dreikurs,
Grunwald, & Pepper, 1999).
When a person is encouraged the person exerts effort and seeks to contribute to
human functioning. Effort is viewed by all theories of motivation as a key
characteristic of motivation, but only the Adlerian perspective emphasizes the crucial
role of ‘contribution’ as a health-providing aspect of motivation. Moreover, Adlerians
integrate the concept of encouragement with mental and social health. In contrast,
when a person is discouraged the individual moves away from contribution and
effort, and Adlerians have long recognized the negative outcomes for the individual
and for society when individuals are discouraged.
Much has been written about extrinsic compared to intrinsic motivation. Ryan
and Deci (2008), who have for many years written about the negative consequences
of extrinsic motivation, wrote recently in ways that sound unmistakably congruent
with the work of Adler and Dreikurs. To quote from their abstract (Ryand & Deci,
2008, p. 702):
 4

“Vitality, or the energy available to the self, is a salient and functionally significant
indicator of health and motivation….. A growing number of experimental and field
studies also suggest that vitality and energy are enhanced by activities that satisfy
basic psychological needs for relatedness, competence, and autonomy.”
Their theory of self determination in its most recent publications emphasizes the
collective good and the need to behave prosocially in family and society (Ryan, Huta,
& Deci, 2008). Research over many years has shown that intrinsic motivation and
autonomy, which are key to prosocial behavior, also help in the way people learn,
solve problems, and work. Their research lends enormous support (Ryan & Deci,
2000) to the concepts of encouragement and discouragement that play a central role
in the way Adlerians view motivation. Of importance is the fact that their self-
determination theory is applied to well-being and psychotherapy and it links the way
people perform in school, the way they live within their families, and the way they
function in a many real-world activities.
Goals, Private Logic, and Evidence for Unaware Motivation and Thought
New neuroscience and cognitive research has shown that many aspects of thought and
motivation are out of awareness. The presentations cover a wide range of research and
support the Adlerian approach to motivation. Increasingly, psychologists have
recognized that human thinking can be out of awareness but potentially accessible to
awareness.
In the early years of Adler’s writing, this was a major dilemma. Freud’s theory of the
Unconscious seemed to be supported by countless case studies, but there was little
support available for the formulation by Adler and Dreikurs that intentions, choices, and
thoughts can be unaware, that they can be fairly readily brought into awareness, and,
that as unaware processes they can involve decision making and setting the direction for
movement of one’s actions. It was only in the last 20 years that convincing literature
appeared in cognitive psychology to show that ideas and information can be processed
 5

implicitly. Prior to that research, scientific psychology could not grapple with Adler’s
formulations. There seemed to be no way for identifying ‘unaware intentions.’ Once the
literature on implicit thought (Kihlstrom, Dorfman, & Park, 2007) became fully
accepted in cognitive psychology, Adler’s idea that one can make choices and form
thoughts without awareness eventually found ample support. It is no longer questioned
and challenged by new students of Adlerian psychology, as it once was. I recall in my
graduate student days telling my colleagues about unaware choices, and this idea was
thoroughly questioned by my colleagues, who had no knowledge of how this could be
possible.
Adlerians have described how life style is developed in the first years of life
(Ferguson, 2008), with many different kinds of experiences leading the child to draw
simple conclusions about “what life is like,” “who I am,” and “how can I find my place”
or the life goal and the means of obtaining that life goal (called ‘modus operandi’).
Recent research has shown how 4- to 5-year-olds can learn flexibly to draw inductive
conclusions, in which they rely on different kinds of information according to the kind
of situation the child encounters (Sloutsky & Fisher, 2008). In a series of experiments,
the researchers showed that young children can learn by means of implicit (unaware)
processes to make inductive inferences and predictions about events. Although there is
controversy about how these inductions occur in young children (Fisher & Sloutsky,
2005), it is clear from research that 5-year-old children draw inferences that follow
developmental changes through to adulthood. Implicit thinking is well established in
young children.
Implicit goals have been identified in a wide range of research studies. The frontal
cortex has been identified as an integrative system that works in tandem with basal
ganglia in goal-directed actions (Miller & Buschman, 2007). Moreover, unaware goals
have been identified in various studies (Chartrand, Dalton, & Cheng, 2008). There is
much evidence that higher-level goal-directed thinking occurs in humans, and there is
 6

also much evidence that many goals are outside of awareness in individuals of all ages.
As Ferguson, Hassin, and Bargh (2008) point out, both conscious and nonconscious
motivations influence goal pursuit and they influence various cognitive processes
related to pursuing goals.
We know from many clinical examples that private logic and goals are
interconnected. The concept of private logic is very important in Adlerian psychology,
and knowing what it is for a given person is crucial for understanding that individual’s
motivation. If a person believes “I am a failure, there is no use in trying to achieve a
good grade” it is logical that the person’s motivation will not be directed to a goal of
high achievement but instead to a goal of ‘saving face’ and safeguarding his or her
status or reputation.
Many research studies explored motivations such as anxiety or the ‘need to
achieve,’ but they have failed to do so in the context of Adlerian concepts involving
private logic and subjective-personal goals. Although social psychologists have come to
understand that motivation can be implicit (nonconscious) and that goals are important
for motivation, most have not recognized the relationship that goals have to what
Adlerians call “private logic.” There are exceptions, in that some have come to write
about motivation in ways that are very close to Adlerians. Unfortunately, they are not
aware of how much their writing is congruent with the work of Adler and Dreikurs.
Dweck and Grant (2008) have pointed out that goals and motivation are intricately tied,
and they show how what they call “self-theories” relate people’s beliefs, goals, and
motivation. Although these authors do not use the term ‘private logic’ they come close
to understanding that concept and how a person’s private beliefs are integrated with
goals and motivation.
Social Interest
The increasing realization of the importance of the social nature of humans has
entered into the writings of neuroscientists, social psychologists, and philosophers.
 7

Hudin (2007), who considers herself a neuroscience philosopher, has proposed that
humans have special neural systems that underlie social action and collective
intentions, and that sociality is basic to human functioning.
Social Interest or Geminschaftsgefǜhl is a basic construct in Adlerian psychology,
and it plays a key role in understanding an individual’s motivation. Does the person
have high Geminschaftsgefǜhl? If so, this person’s motivation will be different than
that of a person with low Geminschaftsgefǜhl.
In the writings of Manaster (Manaster, Cemalcilar, & Knill, 2003; Richardson &
Manaster, 2003) the importance of social interest is clearly articulated. The basis of
mental health of the individual is the amount of social interest the person feels, and
the health of a society is likewise based on the degree to which human beings are
committed to actions that preserve “the greater good.” If our actions are primarily
self-serving, without regard for the welfare of others, pathology is evident both at the
individual and at the societal level. Potentially, societal suicide is possible if humans
do not act with decency, protect each others’ welfare, and guarantee the well being of
the earth’s environment. As Ferguson (2008) wrote, a person’s courage and ability to
cope with diverse stressors rests upon the person’s amount of social interest.
Although many contemporary psychologists are moving close to Adlerian
writings, the lack of appreciation of the contributions of Adler are still far from
recognized or understood. The more the contemporary writers become familiar with
the work of Adlerians, the richer will be their own understanding and depth of
knowledge. It is my hope that before long, Adler’s work will be recognized for its
relevance and far-sightedness and that contemporary researchers can build solidly on
the wealth of information Adlerians have developed and contributed to the larger
society.
 8

References
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: The desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529.
Berridge, K. C. (2007). The debate over dopamine's role in reward: The case for incentive salience.
Psychopharmacology. Vol 191, 391-431.
Chartrand, T. L., Dalton, A. N., & Cheng, C. M. (2008). The antecedents and consequences of
noncoonscious goal pursuit. In Shah, J. Y. & Gardner, W. L. (Eds.). Handbook of motivation science.
(pp. 342 – 355). New York: Guilford Press.
Dinkmeyer, D., & Dreikurs, R. (2000). Encouraging children to learn. Philadelphia: Taylor &
Francis.
Dreikurs, R., Grunwald, B. B, & Pepper, F. (1999). Maintaining sanity in the classroom:
Classroom management techniques. (2nd Ed.). Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis.
Dweck, C. S, & Grant, H. (2008). Self-theories, goals, and meaning. In Shah, J. Y. & Gardner, W.
L. (Eds.). Handbook of motivation science. (pp. 405-416). New York: Guilford Press.
Eisenberger, N. I; Lieberman, M. D., & Williams, K. D. (2003). Does rejection hurt? An fMRI
study of social exclusion. Science. 302(5643) October issue, 290-292.
Ferguson, E. D. (1989). Adler's motivational theory: An historical perspective on belonging and
the fundamental human striving. Individual Psychology: Journal of Adlerian Theory, Research &
Practice, 45, 354-361.
Ferguson, E. D. (2000a). Individual Psychology is ahead of its time. The Journal of Individual
Psychology, 56, 14-19.
Ferguson, E. D. (2000b). Motivation: A biosocial and cognitive integration of motivation and
emotion. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ferguson, E. D. (2001). Adler and Dreikurs: Cognitive-social dynamic innovators. Journal of
Individual Psychology, 57, 324-341.
Ferguson, E. D. (2003). Motivation. In Concise Encyclopedia of Psychology and Neuroscience,
New York: Wiley.
Ferguson, E. D. (2008). Adlerian theory: An introduction. Chicago: Adler School of Professional
Psychology.
Ferguson, M. J., Hassin, R., & Bargh, J. A. (2008). Implicit motivation: Past, present, and future.
 9

In Shah, J. Y. & Gardner, W. L. (Eds.). Handbook of motivation science. (pp. 150 – 166). New York:
Guilford Press.
Fisher, A. V., & Sloutsky, V. M. (2005), When induction meets memory: Evidence for gradual
transition from similarity-based to category-based induction. Child Developmentt,76, 583-597.
Frijda, N. H., Kuipers, P., & Ter Schure, E. (1989). Relations among emotion, appraisal, and
emotional action readiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 212 - 228.
Hudin, J. (2007) Collective intentionality as a primitive. Under review in Journal of Philosophy.

Kihlstrom, J. F., Dorfman, J., & Park, L. (2007). Implicit and explicit memory and learning. In M.
Velmans & S. Schneider (Eds.). The Blackwell companion to consciousness. (pp. 525-539). Malden,
MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Leary, M. R., & Cox, C. B. (2008). Belongingness motivation: A mainspring of social action. In J.
Y. Shah & W. L. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science. (pp. 27 – 40). New York: Guilford
Press.
MacDonald, G., & Leary, Mr. R. (2005). Why does social exclusion hurt? The relationship
between social and physical pain. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 202-223.
Manaster, G. J., Cemalcilar, Z., & Knill, M. (2003). Social interest, the individual, and society:
Practical and theoretical considerations. Journal of Individual Psychology. Vol 59, 109-122.
Miller E. K. & Buschman, T. J. (2007). Bootstrapping your brain: How interactions between the
frontal cortex and basal ganglia may produce organized actions and lofty thoughts. In Kesner, R. P. &
Martinez, J. L. Jr. (Eds.). Neurobiology of learning and memory (2nd ed.). (pp.339 – 354). San Diego,
CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
Richardson, F. C., & Manaster, G. J. (2003). Social interest, emotional well-being, and the quest
for civil society. Journal of Individual Psychology. Vol 59, 123-135.
Ryan, Richard M, Deci, Edward L (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist. Vol 55(1), 68-78.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2008). From ego depletion to vitality: Theory and findings
concerning the facilitation of energy available to the self. Social and Personality Psychology Compass,
2, 702-717.
Ryan, R. M, Huta, V., Deci, Edward L (2008). Living well: A self-determination theory
perspective on eudaimonia. Journal of Happiness Studies. Vol 9, 139-170.
 10

Schultheiss, O. C., Jones, N. M., Davis, A. Q., & Kley, C. (2007). The role of implicit motivation
in hot and cold goal pursuit: Effects on goal progress, goal rumination, and emotional well-being.
Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 971 – 987.
Seligman, M. E. P. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000) Positive psychology: An introduction. American
Psychologist., 55, 5-14.
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T.A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress:
Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410-421.
Seligman, M. E. P., Rashid, T., & Parks, A. C. (2006) Positive psychotherapy. American
Psychologist, 61, 774-788.
Sloutsky, V. M., & Fisher, A. V. (2008). Attentional learning and flexible induction: How
mundane mechanisms give rise to smart behaviors. Child Development, 79, 639-651.