Motivation and Self Motivation

By Amel Lusta
The psychology of foreign language teaching
Subject coordinator : Assist. Prof. Dr. Ozge Razi
 Definition of Motivation
In fact, no agreement on the exact definition of
motivation (Oxford & Shearin, 1994). Dörnyei (1998:
117) comments, “Although ‘motivation’ is a term
frequently used in both educational and research contexts,
it is rather surprising how little agreement there is in the
literature with regard to the exact meaning of the concept”
(p.117).
 Motivation refers to “the reasons underlying
behavior” (Guay et al., 2010, p. 712).

• Gredler, Broussard and Garrison (2004) broadly define

motivation as “the attribute that moves us to do or
not to do something” (p. 106).
• Motivation is the driving force behind any successful
L2 learning and no matter how skilled a language
learner is, long-term learning goals cannot be
achieved without motivation. Gardner and Lambert
posited that motivation could even override aptitude
deficiencies (Gardner & Lambert, 1972).
 FOUR PHASES OF L2 MOTIVATION RESEARCH
The social The cognitive- The process- the socio-dynamic
psychological period situated period oriented period period (current)
(1959–1990) (during the 1990s) (since 2001)

characterized by the characterized by characterized by an characterized by a

work of Gardner and work drawing on interest in concern with
his students and cognitive theories in motivational change, dynamic systems
associates in educational initiated by the work and contextual
Canada. psychology. of Dörnyei, Ushioda, interactions.
and their colleagues
in Europe.
The social psychological period
• The social psychological period in L2 motivation
research flourished in the bilingual context of Canada
from 1959 through 1990 (Dörnyei, 2005; Ushioda,
2012). During this period, Gardner developed the
socio-educational model while Clément and
colleagues explored the theory of linguistic self-
confidence
Gardner’s motivation theory and motivation test

The major principle of Robert Gardner’s motivation

theory was that “students’ attitudes toward the specific
language group are bound to influence how successful
they will be in incorporating that language” (Gardner,
1985, p. 6).
Gardner defined motivation as a ‘combination of effort
plus desire to achieve the goal of learning the language
plus favourable attitudes towards learning the
language’(Gardner, 1985:10).
• The model posits that language achievement is
influenced by integrative motivation, language
aptitude, as well as a number of other factors.
Integrative motivation is the key construct of the Gardner’s socio-educational model which is made up of three
main sub-constructs, each of which is further broken down to subcomponents.
Integrativeness:

Integrativeness

integrative orientation

interest in foreign languages

attitudes toward the L2 community

 “individual’s willingness and interest in social
interaction with members of other groups” (Gardner &
MacIntyre, 1993, p. 159).
Attitudes toward the learning situation, which
comprises attitudes toward the language teacher and
the L2 course.
Motivation, that is, effort, desire, and attitude toward
learning (Gardner, 2001).
A schematic outline of how motivation is related to other ID variables and language achievement.
What is the differences between
orientations and motivations?
• According to Gardner orientations refers to the set of
reasons for which an individual studies the language;
whereas, motivation refers to the driving force which
involves expending effort, expressing desire and
feeling enjoyment. According to Belmsihri & Hammel
(1998), orientations are long–range goals which,
along with attitudes, sustain student’s motivation.
• The criticism of Gardner’s theory is related to the
interpretation of Integrative Motive. That is, Gardner
has three different but very closely related concepts
of integrativeness (i.e. integrative orientation,
integrativeness, and integrative motive/motivation.
the attention of researchers is directed to two
prominent motivational components:
:
1. An interpersonal/affective dimension( integrative
orientation or integrative motivation).
2. A practical/utilitarian dimension, associated with
the potential pragmatic gains of L2 proficiency, such
as to get a better job or to pass a required
examination, which has been referred to as the
instrumental orientation/motivation
• Gardner (2000.2001) proposes that the ‘Motivation’
subcomponent of the integrative Motive can be
combined with instrumentality (instead of
integrativeness) to form Instrumental Motivation.
The Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB)
• a multicomponential motivation questionnaire made
up of over 130 items. It operationalizes all the main
constituents of Gardner’s theory of the integrative
motive and it also includes the additional components
of language anxiety (L2 class anxiety and L2 use
anxiety), parental encouragement, and instrumental
orientation.
• Dörnyei (2005) argues that the items in the
motivation subcomponents conflate the mental
phenomenon of being motivated with behaviors. That
is “it assesses both motivation and motivated
behavior” (Ellis, 2008, p.681). As a result “it is not
easy to decide the exact nature of the underlying trait
that the instruments target” (ibid). That is; the
construct in consideration might not measure what it
intends to.
Clément’s Theory of Linguistic Self-Confidence
• Linguistic self-confidence (a learner’s self-
confidence)refers to the belief that a person has the
ability to produce results, accomplish goals, or
perform tasks competently. This self-confidence is
established through the interaction between the
language learner and members of the language
community, and strengthened based on the quality
and quantity of these interactions.
Adapted from WONG & 黃明霞 (2015)
The Cognitive–Situated Period
• Cognitive perspectives focus on how the learners’
mental processes influence their motivation. Thus, L2
motivation models shifted away from the broad
social psychological perspectives, while more narrow-
viewed microperspectives emerged.
• Researchers discovered that learning happens in a
“dynamic classroom context” (Kimura, 2003) and
that designing an appropriate learning situation in
the classroom, therefore, substantially increases
motivation.
 Self-Determination Theory
• Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2002),
which focuses on various types of intrinsic and
extrinsic motives, has been one of the most
influential approaches in motivational
psychology(Dörnyei, 2003).
• The intrinsic refers to an individual’s motivation to
perform a particular activity because of internal
rewards such as joy, pleasure and satisfaction of
curiosity.
• Whereas in extrinsic motivation the individual
expects an extrinsic reward such as good grades or
praise from others.
(Deci & Ryan, 2009)
• The intrinsic motivation (IM) could be one of three
kinds: IM-Knowledge (the pleasure of knowing new
things), IM-Accomplishment (the pleasure of
accomplishing goals), and IM-Stimulation (the
pleasure sensed when doing the task). Noels (2001),
Vallerand (1997)
 The extrinsic motivation has also been classified along a continuum of
four categories according to the extent
to which the goals are self-determined (Deci & Ryan,

2000): external regulation,introjected

regulation ,identification, and integrated regulation.
Amotivation: A lack of motivation
 External regulation

• The least self-determined form of extrinsic

motivation
 Introjected regulation
Externally imposed rules that the student accepts as
norms he/she should follow not to feel guilty
 Identified Regulation

The person engages in an activity because he/she

highly values and identifies with the behavior, and sees
its usefulness
 Integrated regulation
Identified with importance of behavior, but also
integrates those identification with other aspects of the
self.
• -According to the theory, developed by Deci and his
associates, ‘[t]o be self-determining means to
experience a sense of choice in initiating and
regulating one's own actions’ (Deci, Connell, &
Ryan,1989:580). This is referred to as autonomy.
The hypothesis of SDT is that people have three basic
psychological needs: competence, relatedness, and
autonomy.
Whether the learner wants to learn the L2
or whether the learner has to learn the L2?
• Based on SDT, there are two main types of
motivation: a controlled or in an autonomous way
(Dörnyei, 2001; Vansteenkiste, Lens, and Deci, 2006).
Autonomously motivated individuals experience
volition and choice, whereas controlled motivation
occurs when an individual experiences pressure
(Vansteenkiste, Lens, and Deci, 2006).
Noels, Pelletier, Clément and Vallerand (2000) also
developed a valid and reliable measuring instrument
assessing the various components of self-determination
theory in L2 learning, the Language Learning
Orientations Scale: Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic
Motivation, and Amotivation.
 Attribution Theory
• The uniqueness of the theory stems from its ability to
link individuals’ achievements to past experiences
through the establishment of causal attributions as
the mediating link (ibid). The theory does not look at
the experiences that people undergo but at how they
are perceived by people themselves (Williams &
Burden, 1997:104).
In a school context, learners tend to ascribe their failure
or success (locus of causality) to a number of reasons:
ability and effort, luck, task difficulty, mood, family
background, and help or hindrance from others.
 Task Motivation
Tremblay, Goldberg, and Gardner (1995) : Addressed
duality of generalized and situation-specific motives
(distinguished trait and state motivation).
• Engaging in a certain task activates a number of
different levels of related motivational mindsets or
contingencies associated with the various actional
contexts, resulting in complex interferences.
• The complex of motivational mindsets and
contingencies activated during task performance feed
into a dynamic task processing system that consists of
three interrelated mechanisms: task execution,
appraisal, and action control
Action control Appraisal Task execution

--------------------------refers to the learners’ engagement in task-supportive

learning behaviors, following the action plan that was either provided by
the teacher (through the task instructions) or drawn up by the student or
the task team.
-------------------------refers to the learner’s continuous processing of the
multitude of stimuli coming from the environment and of the progress
made toward the action outcome, comparing actual performances with
predicted ones or with ones that alternative action sequences would offer.
----------------------------processes denote self-regulatory mechanisms that
are called into force in order to enhance, scaffold, or protect learning-
specific action.
The Process-Oriented Period
• This period focus on the dynamic character of
motivation. The models of the process-oriented
period explore the short-term and long-term changes
in the individuals’ motivation as they learn L2. This
approach views motivation as a dynamic factor which
fluctuates within a class period, a year, and a lifetime
Williams and Burden (1997, p. 121) separated three stages of the
motivation process along a continuum:

“Reaso “Deci “Sustai

ns for ding ning the
effort,
doing to do or
somet somet persisti
hing” hing” ng.”
The Dörnyei and Ottó Model of L2 Motivation
• Dörnyei and Ottό developed a process model of L2
learning marked by three distinct, chronological
stages: the preactional stage, the actional stage, and
the postactional stage.

motivational executive choice

retrospection motivation motivation
 The current new socio-dynamic phase
(Dörnyei&Ushioda, 2013)
• This phase is characterized by a focus on the situated
complexity of the L2 motivation process and its organic
development in interaction with a multiplicity of internal,
social, and contextual factors—that is, a move toward
relational or dynamic systems perspectives on motivation
(e.g., Dörnyei, 2009; Ushioda, 2009); and characterized by a
concern to theorize L2 motivation in ways that take account
of the broader complexities of language learning and
language use in the modern globalized world—that is, by
reframing L2 motivation in the context of new theories of
self and identity (Dörnyei, 2005; Dörnyei and Ushioda,
2009).
 NEW CONCEPTUAL ISSUES
• Motivation and Group Dynamics
Some studies (e.g., Dörnyei, 1997; Dörnyei & Malderez,
1997, 1999; Dörnyei & Murphey, 2003; Ehrman &
Dörnyei, 1998; Senior, 1997, 2002; Ushioda,2003) point
out that the motivation of individual learners is
significantly affected by the various groupings they are
part of.
- ‘Group norms’ refer to the overt and covert rules and
routines that help to prevent chaos in the group and
allow everybody to go about their business as
effectively as possible. (Dörnyei)
(e.g.; school regulations - copying certain behaviors of
some influential member or the leader).
 Demotivation
Dörnyei (2001) defined ‘demotivation’ as “specific
external forces that reduce or diminish the motivational
basis of a behavioral intention or an ongoing action” (p.
143).
 Motivational Self-Regulation
The basic assumption underlying the notion of
motivational self-regulation is that students who are
able to maintain their motivation and keep themselves
on-task in the face of competing demands and
attractions should learn better than students who are
less skilled at regulating their motivation
 The Neurobiology of Motivation
Examined L2 acquisition from a neurobiological perspective
The key constituent of Schumann’s theory ( 1998) is stimulus
appraisal, which occurs in the brain along five dimensions:
novelty (degree of unexpectedness/ familiarity), pleasantness
(attractiveness), goal/need significance (whether the stimulus is
instrumental in satisfying needs or achieving goals), coping
potential (whether the individual expects to be able to cope
with the
event), and self and social image (whether the event is
compatible with social norms and the individual’s self-concept).
• As Schumann (2004) has demonstrated, these
appraisals become part of the person’s overall value
system through a special ‘memory for value’ module
and thus stimulus appraisals are largely responsible
for providing the affective foundation of human
action.
‘Possible’ and ‘Ideal Selves’
Markus and Nurius (1986: 954) distinguished between
three main types of possible selves: (1) ‘ideal selves that
we would very much like to become’, (2) ‘selves that we
could become’, and (3) ‘selves we are afraid of becoming’.
The ideal or hoped-for selves might include ‘the successful
self, the creative self, the rich self, the thin self, or the loved
and admired self’.
The motivational aspect of these self-guides is
explained by Higgins’s self-discrepancy theory,
supposing that people are motivated to reach a
condition where their self-concept matches their
personally relevant self-guides.
 L2 Motivational Self System
Dörnyei (2005, 2009) has drawn on the psychological
theory of “possible selves” (Markus and Nurius, 1986)
and developed a new conceptualization of the “L2
Motivational Self System” centered on people’s vision
of themselves in the future.
L2 Motivational Self System, made up of three dimensions:

(1) Ideal L2 Self, referring to the L2-specific facet of one’s ideal self:
If the person we would like to become speaks L2, the Ideal L2
Self is a powerful motivator to learn the L2 because of the desire
to reduce the discrepancy between our actual and ideal selves.
(2) Ought-to L2 Self, referring to the attributes that one believes
one ought to possess (i.e., various duties, obligations, or
responsibilities) in order to avoid possible negative outcomes.
(3) L2 Learning Experience, which concerns situation-specific
motives related to the immediate learning environment and
experience ( e.g.,the enjoyable quality of a language course)
How to Motivate Students
 The future Motivation research agenda
• Fig. 1 provides a schematic representation of the amount of
research output broken down by the biannual time clusters.
In 2005/06 the frequency of publications was equivalent to
one new paper being published every 22 days and this
increased to one paper every five days by 2013/14
 Dörnyei & Ushioda (2013) point out “There is no
doubt in our minds that future research should be
moving toward increasing integration between:
(a) group-based quantitative approaches representing
a macro-perspective and
(b) individual-centered social approaches representing
a situated, micro-perspective.
 New Research Questions
- How are aspects of one’s identity/self related to
facets of one’s motivational intentions or motivated
behavior?

- How do environmental influences and contingencies

shape motivational dispositions?
 References
• Clement, R. (1980). Ethnicity, contact and communicative competence in a second language. In H. Giles, W.
P. Robinson & P. M Smith (Eds.), Language: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 147-154). Oxford:
Pergamon.
• Denies, K., Magnus, I., Desmet, P., Gielen, S., Heyvaert, L., & Janssen, R. (2016). Motivation in a French L2
context: Teacher motivational practices and student attitudes in relation to proficiency. VIAL, Vigo
international journal of applied linguistics, (13), 93-126.
• Dörnyei, Z. Ushioda, E. (2013) Motivation in The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition. (ed.)
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. Routledge.

• Dörnyei , Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language teaching. Language Teaching, 31(3),117-135.
• Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and researching motivation. Harlow, England: Longman.
• Guay, F., Chanal, J., Ratelle, C. F., Marsh, H. W., Larose, S., & Boivin, M. (2010). Intrinsic, identified, and
controlled types of motivation for school subjects in young elementary school children. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 80(4), 711–735
• Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & VonSecker, C. (2000). Effects of integrated instruction on motivation and
strategy use in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 331– 341.
• Oxford, R. & Shearin, J. (1994). Language learning motivation: Expanding the theoretical framework. The
Modern Language Journal. 78(1), 12-28.
• RoninOwl, presentation” Motivation: What moves us, and why? (Self-Determination Theory)” . Avalibled on
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQX_YRu744I

• Tran, N. (2014) .What is Self-Determination Theory?

• WONG, M. H. R., & 黃明霞 . (2015). Impact of overseas immersion homestay experience on linguistic
confidence and intercultural communication strategies.
Slide Title
Product A Product B
• Feature 1 • Feature 1
• Feature 2 • Feature 2
• Feature 3 • Feature 3