Motivation in Psychology: Theories and Applications

Human conduct is influenced by a dynamic blend of factors as biological, psychological, social and cultural factors, economic situations, environmental settings, and outside stressors. Of these, this paper focuses on motivation, an important psychological factor that has a significant influence on the way people act. Motivation can be defined as the inner urge or will to reach a goal, as well as the energy and dedication to do so. It acts as the influence that inspires a person to work and strive toward his or her goals. There can be either intrinsic motivation resulting from personal aims and interests or extrinsic motivation based on external factors, including rewards or threats. 

Motives vs Motivations

An underlying motive, referred to as an impulse, need, or deficit, is what sets us in motion. It’s a condition that activates us and moves us in a particular direction. The term itself derives from the Latin word motio, which means movement, so inherently, a motive is something that propels us into action. In tourism literature, Gnoth (1997) also made a nice distinction between motives and motivations. Motives are broader and do not relate to a particular circumstance, whereas motivations are more concrete and rooted in thinking, such as being attracted to a destination or experience. Motivations are more quantifiable and tangible to observe, whereas motives reveal greater insight into what leads someone to take action. 

Motives can be caused by all sorts of things, both internal and external to us. Basic physical needs such as hunger, thirst, or the need to sleep are everyday motives. These are referred to as physiological or primary needs and are necessary to maintain our bodies in balance. When we fulfil a need, the cycle does not cease to exist; another need typically follows, initiating another set of behaviours to accomplish that need. However, if we are unable to satisfy the initial need, we may abandon it and attempt something else, or that desire may linger until we can address it (Cosmides and Tooby, 2013). 

Perspectives on Motivation 

As far back as the 1940s, psychologist Clark Hull developed the Drive Reduction Theory, which proposes that the majority of our behaviour is driven by an attempt to decrease internal tension. Let’s consider it this way: when your body has a want (such as hunger or thirst), it produces a feeling of discomfort or tension. This discomfort is what drives you to do what’s necessary, such as eating or drinking, to restore balance. This coming back into balance is referred to as homeostasis, and our bodies are constantly striving for it. 

Later, psychologists started looking into another concept known as Arousal Theory, which is all about the amount of mental or physical stimulation we require to feel “just right.” Picture scientists around the table thinking about why some individuals work better under pressure while others shut down. They realised that everyone has a unique optimal level of arousal—some work best with lots of excitement and energy, and others work best in low-pressure, calm environments.

If we strip it down to its essentials, goal-directed behaviour—the kind that drives us toward a goal can be understood as the body’s method of taking action to obtain what it requires or escape what it doesn’t want. In animals (including humans), these behaviours tend to fall into four broad categories: Eating and drinking (ingestive behaviour), Staying warm or cool (thermoregulatory behaviour), Staying safe (defensive behaviour), Reproducing (reproductive behaviour) (llegbusi,2013). 

The first two, eating and maintaining body temperature, are purely about keeping our insides humming along. The other two, staying safe and getting a mate, are more about survival and reproduction on the outside. What’s interesting is that these actions tend to have accompanying feelings and body changes, such as your heart pounding, sweating, or hormonal changes, that allow you to react to what’s occurring. Whether it’s something positive (such as food or affection) or something negative (such as pain or fear), the brain gets involved by placing meaning or emotional significance on what we’re feeling. 

Briefly, directed behaviours are those we’re willing to labour for even with discomfort or effort, because they bring us toward something we desire or steer us away from something we don’t. The brain contains automatic mechanisms that compare the advantages and disadvantages of what we experience, urging us toward what feels good or beneficial and away from what feels bad or harmful (Watts and Swanson, 2002). 

Understanding Motivation through a Behavioural Lens 

In the 1950s and 60s, however, most psychologists assumed that motivation originated outside of a person, through reward, punishment, and other factors outside the individual. This was behaviourist country, where people paid little heed to what was happening inside the head. Even when theories such as drive theory appeared and recognised internal factors, these were presumed to be strictly physical, such as hunger or tiredness.

Psychologist David McClelland provided an alternative perspective by postulating that individuals are motivated by inner drives, like a need to accomplish. But even these drives were unconscious, and only quantifiable by indirect means such as projective tests. On this point, all mainstream psychologists of the day concurred: introspection, examining one’s motives, was unreliable as a scientific approach. Consequently, the notion that we might have control over our actions was shelved. 

But everything started to change in the 1970s. Psychologists began researching concepts regarding personal agency, beliefs about humans being able to make choices and control their behaviour. Such concepts increased in popularity over the 1980s and became a primary point of motivational psychology. Soon after, researchers began to turn their attention toward goals as a key to understanding motivation. Goal-setting and goal-directed behaviour quickly took centre stage and became a foundation for many modern motivational theories. While there are countless theories out there, what follows in this article is a look at the most well-known and influential ones that have shaped the way we understand motivation over the last century (Drotsky,2013). 

Reinforcement and Punishment

When we consider what drives us forward or what brings us to a halt, reinforcement and punishment have a tremendous influence on our behaviour. These two ideas, firmly established within behaviourist psychology, particularly within the work of B.F. Skinner can account for how the payoffs for our behaviour will affect our future actions. Reinforcement, in both positive and negative terms, is simply the process of making a behaviour occur again.

Positive reinforcement provides something pleasant, such as praise, a reward, or a feeling of accomplishment, to encourage us to do it again. Negative reinforcement operates slightly differently; it takes away something unpleasant, such as stress or criticism, after the desired behaviour has taken place, which also makes it more likely to be repeated. Punishment, conversely, seeks to eliminate unwanted behaviour. Positive punishment adds an unpleasant consequence (such as scolding), and negative punishment removes something desirable (such as phone privileges). Although punishment will prevent unwanted behaviour in the short term, it can also induce fear, anxiety, or even resentment when applied too heavily or too often.

What emerges in the research and daily life, however, is that positive reinforcement is much more successful in establishing ongoing motivation and learning. Individuals will tend to remain motivated if they see their hard work valued or rewarded, instead of being penalised for mistakes. The perfect blend of employing reinforcement in making individuals grow and using punishment solely when it’s required is essential for keeping individuals, and particularly students, in favourable and nurturing settings (Graham and Weiner, 2012). 

The Cognitive Take on Motivation 

What students perceive, particularly gifted students, about themselves has a lot to do with their motivation to succeed. If a gifted student believes that they can make a difference in what they excel at, that can be a tremendous motivator. Curiously, these self-perceptions about themselves aren’t something they’re simply born knowing. They develop gradually through interactions with their environment, things such as teacher feedback, experiences at school, and even comparisons with peers. 

Central concepts such as perceived competence (how competent you perceive yourself to be at something) and self-efficacy (how much you believe in your capacity to achieve) are all components of this developing self-concept. Although these words were coined in distinct psychological theories, they describe how students perceive their competence and potential. An essential impact on these beliefs is attribution, how students attribute successes and failures. For example, if a student does well on a test, they might think, “I’m smart” (an ability-based attribution) or “I got lucky.” If they believe they’re capable, they’ll often credit success to their effort or intelligence and blame failure on bad luck.

But students who doubt themselves might do the opposite, blaming failure on their lack of ability, which can be discouraging. For talented children, the big question is: do they have different thoughts about their successes and failures than others? And how do those thoughts influence their motivation? Gifted children tend to pick up on things easily and quickly, and that can make them think that they’re talented. That’s a good thing, but it can also cause pressure. If a student is branded “gifted,” they may shun demanding tasks because they do not want to fail and lose that title.

Rather than celebrating growth, they may opt to do what is easy to guard their reputation. This is where there are key concerns: Does referring to a person as gifted enhance their motivation, or detract from it by causing them to fear failure? These are issues that scholars continue to examine, both in theory and through actual studies (Hamilton et. al, 1988) 

Humanistic Perspectives on the Drive 

The humanistic theory of motivation stresses the very personal and individual nature of human development. In contrast to theories that deal with rewards, punishments, or unconscious motivations, the humanistic school of thought holds that individuals are by nature motivated to develop, become better, and become all that they can be. Psychologists Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers argued that motivation originates from a fundamental need to become the best person one can be, a notion Maslow famously termed “self-actualisation.”

Read: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

In this model, when we have our essential needs such as food, safety, and belonging fulfilled, we begin to look for greater ambitions such as creativity, meaning, and purpose. This approach sees motivation not as something imposed from the outside but as something that rises from within, encouraging self-awareness, autonomy, and personal fulfilment. In essence, humanistic motivation is about more than just achieving goals; it’s about becoming who you are meant to be. (Fergusson et. al. 2024).

Self-Determination Theory

Self-Determination Theory (SDT) has developed over the past 50 years into a human-centred understanding of motivation. It identifies the distinct characteristics of individuals, such as our capacity to reflect, make decisions, and control our behaviour. One of the main concepts in SDT is that motivation is on a continuum: from having zero motivation (amotivation), to feeling controlled or pressured, to feeling completely self-motivated and autonomous.

One study recently examined how Millennials are inspired to give to local and global hunger charities using social media, employing the complete SDT framework. In our globalised, digital age, the way we communicate and what inspires us has evolved. Millennials, especially, are driving today’s society. The research uncovered that a high number of Millennials are motivated by values that connect strongly to what they believe in themselves, highlighting just how critical it is to think about all kinds of motivation in examining behaviour.

Although SDT and humanistic management studies have primarily targeted business, it is equally significant to investigate how such concepts work with nonprofits, social services, and government agencies. There is also increasing interest in implementing humanistic values, such as corporate responsibility, social benefit, and environmental stewardship, in a manner that is substantive and not merely cosmetic. These topics need more emphasis in future practice and research (Winston, 2016) 

A Psychoanalytic Dive into Motivation 

Psychoanalytic theory, first formulated by Sigmund Freud, provides a distinctive perspective on human motivation through an emphasis on the unconscious mind. From this view, much of what motivates our behaviour is not entirely in our conscious awareness. Deep-seated desires, fears, and unconscious conflicts, often rooted in childhood experience, can influence our goals, actions, and even our resistance to change. Freud thought that our behaviours are driven by the ongoing struggle between primitive instinctual drives (such as sex and aggression) and the social and moral codes we’ve internalised.

Motivation, in this sense, is viewed as an ongoing struggle between the id (our more primitive needs), the ego (our logical self), and the superego (our internalised standards). For instance, a person could be strongly motivated to excel not only out of ambition, but as a means of obtaining validation or the avoidance of early based feelings of inferiority. Later theorists such as Carl Jung and Alfred Adler broadened these concepts by emphasising other drives, including seeking purpose or escaping feelings of inferiority. Generally speaking, psychoanalytic theory indicates that we are complexly motivated, frequently hidden from view, and influenced by emotional currents we may not even know exist (Pittman, 1987). 

Within our drives or the Social Environment – Push or Pull?

The Intricacies of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation 

Psychologist Robert White came up with the concept of effectance motivation, or the motivation to be effective and in control of our world. Likewise, researchers such as Harlow and Berlyne demonstrated that curiosity, the desire to explore and learn, has a large influence on behaviour, particularly in pursuing new experiences or sensory stimulation. This work was expanded by Daniel Hunt to state that human beings have their own “sweet spot” when it comes to stimulation; they want neither too little nor too much, and are continually seeking the balance (Pittman, 1987). 

This stance toward motivation rejected the behaviourist thinkers such as B.F. Skinner, who argued that people can be defined through external stimuli of reward or punishment, independent of internal forces. Rather, this new perspective acknowledged that motivation can be internal, such as personal interest or curiosity (intrinsic motivation), or external, such as rewards or praise (extrinsic motivation). Researchers such as Julian Rotter and Harold Kelley demonstrated that individuals tend to use both types of explanations when considering their actions, sometimes viewing it as self-motivated, and sometimes as influenced by their surroundings (Dweck, 2024). 

Subsequently, Edward Deci and Richard deCharms built on this by demonstrating that how others, such as parents, teachers, or supervisors, provide control and rewards can determine whether an individual perceives their behaviour as freely chosen or controlled by others. This set the stage for intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. In essence, any activity, such as learning, playing a sport, or working on a project, can be performed either for intrinsic interest or due to an external reward.

When a person is intrinsically motivated, they’re driven by personal satisfaction, curiosity, or the need to develop. But when they’re extrinsically motivated, their actions are influenced more by rewards, deadlines, or social expectations. Most of the work since then has been concerned with what affects what type of motivation individuals tend toward, and how it influences their choices and behaviours. 

When we speak of what moves people to act, we frequently hear of two major forms of motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation originates from within its internal drive to learn something new, create a solution for something, or accomplish something difficult simply because it is rewarding or stimulating. An example would be a child constructing a LEGO tower for the pure enjoyment of it, or one learning a musical instrument solely out of enjoyment.

In contrast, extrinsic motivation refers to doing something to receive a reward or to avoid punishment, such as studying for an exam to obtain a good mark or staying late at work to receive a bonus. Both forms of motivation are crucial, but they tend to produce varying results. 

Rewards and Motivation 

According to studies, when individuals are intrinsically motivated, they are more likely to restrict rewards. Initial research by Thorndike and later work by other psychologists showed that giving rewards to students, for example, money or other rewards, can cause them to learn more, at least to some extent. These experiments suggest that if kids are given an obvious cue (signal) and rewarded when responding correctly, they will learn. Rewards are believed to remove inner conflict by satisfying some of the individual’s drives or needs, and this makes learning more efficient and simpler. While rewards can be a very effective way of motivating students, they come with their problems, especially if used improperly.

One major problem is that rewards will often feel like bribes. When a teacher praises, rewards, or even pays for getting something done, students might start thinking that the task itself is not important; it’s the reward. That kind of thinking is risky. What about tasks that need to be done just because they’re important or important, even if there is no reward? A second issue is that students will start to focus solely on what they must do to win the reward. Along the way, they can ignore other valuable, “extra” bits of information that would make their learning worthwhile in the long run. 

Rewards also tend to go only to a select few, raising a tough question: What about the students who don’t win anything? With only three awarded, but twenty students in competition, most will be left with nothing. While rewards can boost winners’ confidence, they also leave losers feeling discouraged or dejected. And worse still, in some cases, like in Nigeria, winners might even become an object of jealousy or exclusion by their peers, who would make them feel isolated and alone rather than proud (Bandhu et. al, 2024). Another problem is that the reward is always at the mercy of someone who has power over others, usually the teacher. 

That is to say that there needs to be constraints and regulations imposed on students so that they cannot find ways to cheat or bypass the work. But then it also implies that the worth of the reward becomes associated with an artificial process instead of the work itself. At some point, students will no longer think independently but rather just learn to perform what the teacher is asking. That kills creativity and independence. Instead of becoming confident learners, students may become adult-dependent in relying on approval from figures of authority. Eventually, if rewards are used thoughtlessly, they can limit a student’s growth, curiosity, and self-motivation virtues at the heart of true education.

Conflicts in motivation 

We all have difficult choices in life, and psychology has a neat system for categorising the kinds of inner conflicts we experience when making a choice. 

One of the common dilemmas is the Avoidance-Avoidance Conflict, where you are forced to choose between two unpleasant things. Consider being stuck between doing a boring task and cleaning the entire house. Neither is pleasant, but you still have to make a choice. And finally, there’s the Approach-Avoidance Conflict, in which a single decision has both a plus and minus element, like desiring cake (mmmm!) but dreading the calories (not so yum!). The most complex of the lot is the Double Approach-Avoidance Conflict.

This happens when you’re caught between two alternatives, and both have pluses and negatives. Suppose one had to choose between two job prospects: one is well-paying but demands long working hours, and the other is a work-life balance but lower remuneration (Chen et. al. 2025). Conclusion: Motivation is not a blanket force; it’s an intricate and dynamic waltz of our behaviour, thoughts, feelings, needs, and even unconscious desires. 

Conclusion 

Under the behavioural perspective, we see how external rewards and punishments shape our behaviours. Cognitive accounts place importance on the significant part that goals, expectations, and beliefs play. Humanistic accounts recall to mind our requirement for growth and self-actualisation, and psychoanalytic accounts take us even deeper into our unconscious drive. The push-and-pull of intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation proves that the basis for motivation can both arise from outside ourselves and inside ourselves.

Recognising motivation from a variety of psychological viewpoints not only benefits researchers and therapists, but it also brings greater insight to all of us regarding our drives, struggles, and aspirations. Whether we are working toward an individual goal or trying to serve others more effectively, with vision of the many layers of motivation can lead to greater empathy, greater understanding, and ultimately, greater significant progress. 

FAQs 

How do people resolve such inner conflicting goals? 

It is all a matter of applying thinking strategies, such as balancing the pros and cons or seeing again in what way they look at the problem. Others use emotional coping, rehearsing coping with the pressure of making a difficult choice. Others use decision models, systematic methods for ploughing through it, to assist in breaking the mental logjam. It could be flipping a coin or writing out of your head, but our minds are always thinking to lead us closer to sense whenever we find ourselves between two options. 

Which motivational type is better for long-term results, intrinsic or extrinsic?

Where the question of sustaining motivation in the long term is involved, intrinsic motivation has been proven to perform better than extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation is internal, it’s driven by interest, enjoyment, or a sense of purpose. Because it’s self-motivated, it tends to generate more persistence, more engagement, and more lasting satisfaction. Extrinsic motivation, founded on outside rewards like money, compliments, or deadlines, can be effective in the short term but will disappear when those rewards are removed.

In some cases, relying too heavily on outside rewards will even kill intrinsic interest. For long-term health and success, developing intrinsic motivation, doing something because it matters to you, is usually the stronger and more enduring route. Likely to be creative, diligent, and contented. Extrinsic motivation can work too, particularly for short-term objectives, but if misused, it can on occasion destroy someone’s inherent interest in a task. It is all about getting the balance right, and in most instances, shifting extrinsic motivation to intrinsic over time by linking tasks to self-means or interest.