ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

Can immediate (vs. delayed) rewards increase intrinsic motivation? Prior research compared the presence versus absence of rewards. By contrast, this research compared immediate versus delayed rewards, predicting that more immediate rewards increase intrinsic motivation by creating a perceptual fusion between the activity and its goal (i.e., the reward). In support of the hypothesis, framing a reward from watching a news program as more immediate (vs. delayed) increased intrinsic motivation to watch the program (Study 1), and receiving more immediate bonus (vs. delayed, Study 2; and vs. delayed and no bonus, Study 3) increased intrinsic motivation in an experimental task. The effect of reward timing was mediated by the strength of the association between an activity and a reward, and was specific to intrinsic (vs. extrinsic) motivation-immediacy influenced the positive experience of an activity, but not perceived outcome importance (Study 4). In addition, the effect of the timing of rewards was independent of the effect of the magnitude of the rewards (Study 5).
Content may be subject to copyright.
Running Head: IMMEDIACY INCREASES INTRINSIC MOTIVATION
It's About Time: Earlier Rewards Increase Intrinsic Motivation
Kaitlin Woolley, Cornell University
Ayelet Fishbach, University of Chicago
In press, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Corresponding Author:
Kaitlin Woolley
Cornell University
403 Sage Hall
Ithaca, NY 14850
Phone: 607-255-9470
Email: krw67@cornell.edu
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 2
Abstract
Can immediate (vs. delayed) rewards increase intrinsic motivation? Prior research compared the
presence versus absence of rewards. By contrast, this research compared immediate versus
delayed rewards, predicting that more immediate rewards increase intrinsic motivation by
creating a perceptual fusion between the activity and its goal (i.e., the reward). In support of the
hypothesis, framing a reward from watching a news program as immediate (vs. delayed)
increased intrinsic motivation to watch the program (Study 1), and receiving an immediate bonus
(vs. delayed, Study 2; and vs. delayed and no bonus, Study 3) increased intrinsic motivation in an
experimental task. The effect of reward timing was mediated by the strength of the association
between an activity and a reward, and was specific to intrinsic (vs. extrinsic) motivation
immediacy influenced the positive experience of an activity, but not perceived outcome
importance (Study 4). In addition, the effect of the timing of rewards was independent of the
effect of the magnitude of the rewards (Study 5).
Keywords: intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, immediate/delayed rewards, motivation, self-control
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 3
What motivates you to read this article? To what extent are you intrinsically motivated;
that is, you enjoy the experience of learning about psychological research, feeling interested and
engaged in reading? By definition, an activity is intrinsically motivated when it is experienced as
an end in itself; when an individual is motivated to pursue the activity for its own sake because
the benefits for pursuing the activity cannot be separated from it (Heath, 1999; Kruglanski et al.,
in press; Lepper, Greene, & Nisbett, 1973; Rheinberg, 2008; Sansone & Harackiewicz, 1996).
Research often contrasts intrinsic motivation with extrinsic motivation, which is the motivation
to complete an activity to achieve external benefits that are separate outcomes from pursuing the
activity (Higgins & Trope, 1990; Kruglanski et al., 1975; Mischel, Shoda, & Rodriguez, 1989;
Ryan & Deci, 2000; Wrzesniewski et al., 2014). Reading this article is extrinsically motivated if
you do so to acquire some important knowledge you can apply later. Indeed, a combination of
intrinsic motives (the positive feeling in the process) and extrinsic motives (the positive value of
the outcome) underlie most activities people pursue, such as reading this article (Fishbach &
Choi, 2012; Schwartz & Wrzesniewski, 2016).
Our definition of intrinsic motivationexperiencing an activity as its own endimplies
a perceptual fusion between the activity and its outcome; the activity and its end are strongly
associated and are seen as inseparable (Fishbach, Shah, & Kruglanski, 2004; Kruglanski et al., in
press). Thus, while an intrinsically motivated activity is goal directed, the attainment of the goal
and the pursuit of the activity are no longer separable and the person experiences pursuing the
activity as achieving the goal.
This analysis implies that intrinsicality varies on a continuum. Because the degree of
fusion, that is, the strength of association between an activity and its outcome, varies, so too does
intrinsic motivation. Activities that are strongly associated with their goal are more intrinsically
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 4
motivated than activities that are weakly associated with their goal. For example, as much as
reading this article (the activity) is hopefully associated with satisfying curiosity (the goal), it is
possible that another activity (e.g., social media) is even more closely associated with satisfying
curiosity and hence, more intrinsically motivated. Moreover, the positive properties of goal
attainment transfer to the activity as a function of their association (Fishbach et al., 2004). The
closer the association, the more the properties of goal attainment, be that satisfying curiosity,
inducing relief, or evoking pride, come to characterize the activity as well.
The Number of Links Determines the Activity-Goal Association
What, then, determines the strength of the activity-goal association, and thus influences
intrinsic motivation? Previous research identified that this association is a function of the number
of goals an activity achieves. Classic research on the overjustification effect demonstrated that
adding a goal to an activity undermines intrinsic motivation (Lepper, 1981; Lepper & Greene,
1978; Tang & Hall, 1995). Children were less intrinsically motivated to color after they learned
they would get a prize for coloring (Lepper et al., 1973). Adding a new goal (i.e., the prize)
diluted the association between coloring and other goals (e.g., self-expression), undermining
intrinsic motivation to color. Similarly, children were less intrinsically motivated to eat certain
foods (e.g., crackers) after learning the foods served other goals beyond good taste (e.g., that in
addition to tasting good, these crackers would also make them healthier or smarter; Maimaran &
Fishbach, 2014). Although adding rewards does not always decrease, and at times, increases
intrinsic motivation (Eisenberger & Cameron, 1996; Goswami & Urminsky, 2017), it is likely
that whenever the introduction of external rewards decreases intrinsic motivation, it occurs by
diluting the association between the activity and the original goal.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 5
Research on the Dilution Effect directly tested how increasing the number of goals an
activity achieves decreases the association between the activity and any one of these goals,
reducing the perceptual fusion between the activity and goal attainment (Orehek, Mauro,
Kruglanski, & van der Bles, 2012; Zhang, Fishbach, & Kruglanski, 2007). In one study, the
association between jogging and increasing the oxygen level in blood was weaker when
participants learned about a second goal: that jogging is also a means for strengthening various
muscles (Zhang et al., 2007). By weakening the association strength between the activity and its
goal, a “multifinalmeans (i.e., activity that serves multiple goals) appeared less associated and
hence, motivated by any of these goals. In another study, a task that served two goals (e.g.,
learning and making money) was less intrinsically motivated than the same task that served only
one goal (learning; Lafrenière, Bélanger, Kruglanski, & Vallerand, 2011).
Relatedly, research on activity engagement theory documented that the addition of any
goal, be it typically intrinsic or extrinsic, undermines intrinsic motivation by diluting the
association between the activity and the original goal (Higgins, Lee, Kwon, & Trope, 1995;
Higgins & Trope, 1990; Higgins, Trope, & Kwon, 1999). For example, elementary school
children felt less intrinsically motivated to read when reading was first associated with coloring
via a coloring storybook, and then the coloring activity was removed from reading (Higgins et
al., 1995). Adding and then removing an intrinsic goal (self-expression through coloring) had a
similar effect as adding and then removing an external reward, such that both undermined
intrinsic motivation.
Not only does adding a goal to an activity decrease intrinsic motivation for that activity,
but adding an activity that serves the same goal similarly reduces intrinsic motivation for the
original activity (i.e., “equifinal” means; Bélanger, Schori-Eyal, Pica, Kruglanski, & Lafrenière,
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 6
2015). In one study, people learned about either one or two activities that achieve the goal of
connecting with others. When presented with two ways to connect with others, “hanging out with
other people” and “helping others,” people were less intrinsically motivated to engage in either
activity than when presented with only one of the activities that served the connection goal
(Bélanger et al., 2015).
Overall, existing research finds evidence that the number of links between an activity and
a goal determines their associationthe means-ends fusion—with additional links negatively
affecting intrinsic motivation. But this literature is silent on other determinants of the strength of
the activity-goal association. Might proximity between an activity and its goal also matter? We
argue that this is indeed the case.
Temporal Activity-Goal Association
We hypothesize that delivering a goal more immediately increases intrinsic motivation.
In this way, immediacy, similar to the number of links between activities and goals, affects the
strength of the activity-goal association such that the activity is more strongly fused with its goal,
and as a result, the activity is more intrinsically motivated.
This hypothesis is consistent with conditioning research, which finds that proximity
between an activity and a goal strengthens their association (De Houwer, Thomas, & Baeyens,
2001; Razran, 1954). Immediately presenting a liked or disliked stimuli (US), such as food or a
shock, after a neutral stimuli (CS), such as a sound, can lead to approach or avoidant behavior
when the sound is presented alone (Dickinson, 1980). Importantly, for both animals and humans,
a shorter delay between the conditioned and unconditioned stimulus is associated with a stronger
conditioned response (Balsam, Drew & Gallistel, 2010; Boakes & Costa, 2014; McAllister,
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 7
1953; Wolfle, 1932). If proximity is a driver of associative learning, it could increase intrinsic
motivation.
We explore our hypothesis by manipulating the delivery time of rewards (i.e., the goal of
pursuing the activity). We use rewards that are internal to an activity and are therefore typically
considered intrinsic (e.g., becoming more informed from watching the news), as well as rewards
that are external to the activity and are therefore typically considered extrinsic (e.g., receiving
bonus payment for a task). We expect reward timing to influence intrinsic motivation when the
reward is internal as well as external.
We compare immediate rewards to delayed rewards as well as to no rewards. The latter
comparison to no rewards allows us to contrast our prediction with a prediction based on the
overjustification effect. Whereas previous research found that rewards can crowd out intrinsic
motivation for activities not typically associated with these rewards (Lepper et al., 1973), this
effect is not universal (e.g., Eisenberger & Cameron, 1996). For example, whereas monetary
payments for a game not associated with financial incentives (i.e., wooden block game)
decreased intrinsic motivation, the same payments increased intrinsic motivation when money
was a feature of the activity (i.e., coin-toss game; Kruglanski et al., 1975). In studying activities
that are typically rewarded (e.g., participating in a paid experiment), we predict that an
immediate reward will increase intrinsic motivation relative to both a delayed and no-reward.
We further predict the effect of reward timing is unique to intrinsic motivationthe
pursuit of the activity as its own end. Extrinsic motivation—pursuing an activity to receive
external outcomesis unlikely affected by a strong activity-goal association. The activity
continues to serve the goal and leads to the expected positive outcome regardless of the goal’s
temporal arrival, and as such, immediacy should have a weaker effect on the evaluation of the
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 8
activity’s outcome as important. Accordingly, we test for discriminant validity: whether
immediate rewards increase intrinsic motivation (positive experience) more than extrinsic
motivation (perceived outcome importance). For example, a reading task that provides an
immediate bonus should feel more enjoyable and fun (intrinsically motivated), but should not be
evaluated as more important or useful for achieving the bonus (extrinsically motivated), than a
task that provides the same bonus with a delay.
An alternative hypothesis is that an earlier reward actually increases extrinsic motivation
because earlier rewards can be psychologically larger due to temporal discounting (Ainslie &
Haslam, 1992; Frederick, Loewenstein, & O’Donoghue, 2002). For example, most people value
$100 now more than $100 in one year and thus, the earlier reward could be larger and therefore,
more extrinsically motivating, rendering the outcome of the activity as more important.
However, we expect that the effect of timing on intrinsic motivation is larger than the effect of
timing on extrinsic motivation; for example, immediate rewards will render an activity more
pleasant to pursue but not necessarily more important for achieving the outcome.
A related alternative prediction, based on temporal discounting, is that earlier rewards
only increase intrinsic motivation because earlier rewards are larger rewards, and not because
they create an activity-goal fusion. Such an alternative requires that earlier rewards increase both
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (whereas we predict a stronger effect on intrinsic motivation).
In addition, we test this alternative by independently varying the magnitude and timing of a
reward. If proximity has a similar effect as an increase in magnitude, it is possible that proximal
rewards are simply psychologically larger rewards. In contrast, if, as we predict, an earlier
reward has a stronger effect on increasing intrinsic motivation than a larger reward, it is more
likely that timing has an effect that is independent of the effect of magnitude.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 9
Present Research
Across five studies, we tested our hypothesis that immediate (vs. delayed) rewards
increase intrinsic motivation by strengthening the activity-goal association. We operationalized
intrinsic motivation by drawing on past research, using self-report measures of interest and
enjoyment, as well as a behavioral indicatorthe likelihood of choosing to engage in the focal
task during a free-choice period and absent additional rewards (Deci, 1971; Kruglanski et al.,
1975; Lepper et al., 1973). We tested our hypothesis across a variety of tasks (e.g., watching the
news, working, and reading).
Specifically, Study 1 tested whether framing rewards as arriving immediately versus with
a delay increases intrinsic motivation. Study 2 manipulated reward timing, testing whether an
actual immediate reward increases intrinsic motivation compared with a delayed reward. Next,
Study 3 added a no-reward condition, testing whether immediate rewards increase intrinsic
motivation compared with delayed and no rewards. The remaining studies examined the process
underlying our hypothesis. Study 4 tested whether immediate rewards increase intrinsic but not
extrinsic motivation (discriminant validity), by strengthening the activity-goal association
(mediation). Specifically, Study 4 assessed intrinsic motivation as well as extrinsic motivation,
operationalized as the importance of receiving external outcomes (Brehm & Self, 1989; Heath,
1999; Locke & Latham, 1990; Touré-Tillery & Fishbach, 2014; Woolley & Fishbach, 2015).
Finally, Study 5 examined whether immediate rewards increase intrinsic motivation more than
larger rewards do, which implies that the effect of immediacy does not result from temporal
discounting and differences in magnitude of immediate versus delayed rewards.
We sought to maximize power across all studies by using a minimum sample of 50
participants per condition, and using previous effect sizes to estimate sample size where possible
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 10
(i.e., Studies 1 and 4). Power analyses conducted in G*Power (Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner,
2007) for each study showed that based on the respective sample sizes and an alpha probability
of .05, power was sufficient across all studies (i.e., ≥ .80) to detect a small to medium effect
(e.g., d = .35, ηp2 = .035).1 We further used measures adopted from previous research on intrinsic
motivation (Deci, 1971; Kruglanski et al., 1975; Lepper et al., 1973). Overall, the studies in this
paper incorporate data from an online sample of American participants and university students.
All studies reported received IRB review and approval.
Study 1: Framing Rewards as Immediate versus Delayed Increases Intrinsic Motivation
Study 1 examined whether framing the rewards of an activity as immediate (vs. delayed)
increases intrinsic motivation. Participants watched a clip from a satirical news program and
elaborated on how two benefits from watching the show (i.e., becoming more informed and
gaining conversation topics) arrive either immediately or with a delay before reporting their
intrinsic motivation to watch the news program.
Method
Participants. A priori, we conducted a power analysis using G*Power software, with an
estimated effect size of d = .35 based on Supplemental Study 1. Results revealed a total sample
of 232 was needed to have power of .80 to detect an effect size (d) of .35, using an alpha of .05.
We opened the study for 240 HITs on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk). A total of 242
workers participated for monetary compensation. A priori we planned to exclude participants
who had previously seen this specific clip (n = 22), leaving a total sample of 220 (Mage = 35.59,
SD = 11.55; 109 female; following Zhou & Fishbach, 2016, we tested for attrition: no
participants dropped the survey after random assignment).
1 We report all data exclusions (if any), all manipulations, and all measures for all studies. The raw data for all
studies are available in an online data repository (http://bit.ly/2qv69GU).
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 11
Procedure. This study employed a 2 (reward timing: immediate vs. delayed) between-
participants design. Participants watched a 75-second clip from a satirical news program, Last
Week Tonight with John Oliver, from an episode on Tibetan Buddhists and the Dalai Lama. To
participate in the study, participants needed to complete a sound check that required them to
listen to and type in a string of four numbers. Participants then spent 75 seconds watching and
listening to the video clip. During this time, they were not able to advance the survey.
We next manipulated whether participants framed the rewards from watching the news
program as immediate versus delayed. To hold the reward content constant, all participants read
“Watching news clips like this can provide a number of benefits. For example, other participants
told us that watching this clip helps them become more informed about certain issues and gain
conversation topics.” We asked participants in the immediate-reward condition to “Think about
and elaborate on how becoming more informed and gaining conversation topics is an immediate
benefit you receive in the moment while watching this clip.” We asked participants in the
delayed-reward condition to “Think about and elaborate on how becoming more informed and
gaining conversation topics is a delayed benefit you receive in the days or weeks after watching
this clip.” For example, participants in the immediate-reward condition wrote “It basically
educates you on the spot” and “You are learning and forming opinions about this issue with the
Dalai Lama and Tibet while you are watching the clip.Participants in the delayed-reward
condition wrote “It may give you the insight you need in future situations, or might even give
you something relatable to talk about in future situations” and “You can talk about it when the
topic comes up.”
To measure self-reported intrinsic motivation, we adapted measures from the interest-
enjoyment dimension of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (McAuley, Duncan, & Tammen,
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 12
1989; Ryan, 1982; Vallerand, 1997; see also Harackiewicz, 1979): (1) “How much did you enjoy
watching this news clip?” (2) “How interesting was it to watch this news clip?” (0 = not at all, 6
= very much), and (3) “To what extent did watching this news clip feel more like work or more
like fun?” (0 = more like work, 6 = more like fun).
At the end of the survey, participants answered “How often do you watch Last Week
Tonight with John Oliver?” (M = 2.15, SD = 1.48) and “Have you seen this clip or episode
before?” Responses to these measures did not differ by condition (familiarity with this program:
t(218) = .21, p = .833, 95% CI of the difference (95% CIdiff) = [-.44, .35], d = .03; viewed this
clip previously, χ2(1, N = 242) = .106, p = .745, ϕ = .02) and we did not analyze them further.
Results and Discussion
We collapsed the three items measuring intrinsic motivation (α = .90). In support of our
hypothesis, participants reported greater intrinsic motivation to watch the news program after
framing the rewards from it as immediate (M = 4.72, SD = 1.16) versus delayed (M = 4.24, SD =
1.54), t(218) = 2.61, p = .010, 95% CIdiff = [.12, .84], d = .35. For a conceptual replication of this
study using a different task, see Study 1 in the Supplemental Materials.
This study provides initial evidence that immediate rewards increase intrinsic motivation
compared with delayed rewards. When participants framed the same rewards from watching the
same news program as arriving sooner, they were more intrinsically motivated to watch the
program than when they framed these rewards as arriving with a delay.
Study 2: Receiving Immediate versus Delayed Rewards Increases Intrinsic Motivation
In Study 2, we assessed participants’ intrinsic motivation in a task that delivered either
immediate (simultaneous, in this case) or delayed rewards. Participants completed an
experimental task in exchange for chocolate rewards. In the immediate-reward condition,
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 13
participants received the chocolate and the task simultaneously (but were not allowed to eat until
after the task). In the delayed-reward condition, they saw the chocolate and learned they would
receive it after completing the task. We predicted that receiving an immediate (vs. delayed)
chocolate reward would increase intrinsic motivation for the experimental task.
Method
Participants. An experimenter approached 101 (Mage = 22.72, SD = 4.00; 31 female)
undergraduate students seated in a common area on-campus to complete a paper survey.
Procedure. The study used a 2 (reward timing: immediate vs. delayed) between-
participants design. An experimenter recruited participants by asking them to take a short
research survey before assigning them to condition. In the immediate-reward condition, the
experimenter said, “For working on the survey, we’re offering a piece of chocolate.” Participants
had a choice between a milk chocolate truffle and a chocolate hazelnut truffle. After making their
selection, the experimenter handed participants a survey, asking them to complete it before
eating. In the delayed-reward condition, the experimenter showed participants the chocolates and
said, “After you finish the survey, you’ll receive a piece of chocolate.” After participants
completed the survey, they selected their chocolate. We required all participants to complete the
survey before eating the chocolate.
At the end of the survey (which contained filler items irrelevant to our hypothesis, see
Appendix A), we included three items measuring intrinsic motivation (similar to Study 1): (1)
“How enjoyable was working on this survey?” (2) “How interesting was this survey?” (0 = not at
all, 6 = very much), and (3) “To what extent did filling out the survey feel more like work or
more like fun?” (-3 = more like work, 3 = more like fun). We also measured participants’ interest
in the task absent a chocolate reward (i.e., during a free-choice period; modeled after Calder &
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 14
Staw, 1975): (4) “If we had another similar survey for you to work on in the future, but that did
not offer candy, would you be interested in working on it?” (0 = not at all, 6 = very much).
Results and Discussion
We coded the four items measuring intrinsic motivation on a scale from 0 to 6 and
collapsed them (α = .78). As predicted, intrinsic motivation was higher for a task offering an
immediate reward (M = 3.52, SD = .94) compared with a delayed reward (M = 3.03, SD = .94),
t(99) = 2.57, 95% CIdiff = [.11, .85], p = .012, d = .52. Participants who received the chocolate
with (vs. after) the experimental task, found the task more intrinsically motivating, even though
none of them consumed the chocolate until after the task ended.
In this study, we were constrained to providing the chocolate compensation in close
proximity to the task, both in the immediate and delayed conditions, which possibly manipulated
not only temporal distance, but also spatial distance. Theoretically, temporal and spatial distance
both operate by influencing the strength of the activity-goal association. However, our primary
focus is to understand the effect of reward timing on intrinsic motivation. To more directly test
this question, we moved to an online platform, which allowed us to compare an immediate bonus
provided after completing a task (similar to the delayed condition from Study 2), with a more
delayed rewarda bonus that arrives a month later.
Study 3: Immediate Rewards Increase Intrinsic Motivation Compared with Delayed and
No Rewards
Participants in Study 3 received a bonus upon task completion or one month later. We
also added a no-bonus control group. In addition to earning a fixed payment for completing their
experimental task, some participants learned of a bonus payment for working on a spot-the-
difference task (delivered immediately or with a delay), whereas the other participants did not
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 15
expect to receive a bonus (no bonus reward control). With this third condition, we tested our
prediction that an immediate bonus increases intrinsic motivation compared with either a delayed
bonus or no bonus.
In this study, we also introduced a behavioral measure of intrinsic motivation by
adjusting the free-choice paradigm to this context (Lepper, 1981; Lepper & Greene, 1978). We
predicted participants who received an immediate bonus (vs. a delayed or no bonus) would want
to continue the same spot-the-difference task even with no additional compensation.
Method
Participants. We opened the study for 225 (n = 75 per cell) HITs on MTurk. A total of
223 workers participated in the study for monetary compensation (Mage = 38.56, SD = 12.62; 127
female; two participants (one from each condition) dropped the survey after random assignment.
Procedure. This study employed a 3 (bonus-reward timing: immediate-bonus vs.
delayed-bonus control vs. no-bonus control) between-participants design. All participants
worked on the experiment for a fixed payment of $0.30. Some participants learned of a $0.60
bonus that was tied to completing a spot-the-difference task: a third of the participants learned
this $0.60 bonus would automatically pay out immediately after they finished the spot-the-
difference task (immediate-bonus), whereas another third learned the $0.60 bonus would be
automatically paid to them one month after completing the spot-the-difference task (delayed-
bonus control). A final third of participants did not expect to receive a bonus for completing the
spot-the-difference task (no-bonus control).
Participants completed a study, presumably on visual perception, which involved
completing a spot-the-difference task (see Appendix B). They viewed two similar images and
had to locate four out of five preexisting differences between them, by clicking on the part of the
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 16
image that was different, which left a red dot there. They received progress feedback for each
difference they found (e.g., “You found 1/5 differences!”). After successfully locating four
differences, participants answered questions assessing intrinsic motivation to work on the spot-
the-different task. The first two were taken from Studies 1-2: (1) “How much did you enjoy
working on this spot-the-difference task?” and (2) “How interesting was this spot-the-difference
task?” We included a reverse-coded measure to reduce acquiescent bias: (3) “How dull or boring
was this spot-the-difference task?” (0 = not at all, 6 = very much). As an additional measure, we
asked: (4) “Completing tasks like this can be something you have to do or something you want to
do. To what extent did working on this spot-the-difference task feel like something you had to do
or feel like something you wanted to do?” (0 = something I had to do, 6 = something I wanted to
do). Previous research used similar items to assess intrinsic motivation (e.g., have-to vs. want-to
goals; Milyavskaya, Inzlicht, Hope, & Koestner, 2015). A response closer to “wanted to do
represented greater intrinsic motivation (e.g., Reeve, Jang, Hardre, & Omura, 2002; Reeve, Nix,
& Hamm, 2003; Ryan, 1982).
As a behavioral measure of intrinsic motivation, we next assessed participants’ task
selection in a free-choice paradigm. That is, we measured whether participants chose to continue
engaging in the focal task or end the survey, for no extra compensation (Lepper, 1981; Lepper &
Greene, 1978). If participants chose to engage in the task for no additional compensation, we
took this as evidence that they were intrinsically motivated to do so. Participants read “You now
have a choice, you can continue working on the spot-the-difference task to find the 5th and final
difference, or you can end the study.” Depending on their choice, participants ended the study
either after finding the last difference or right then.
Results and Discussion
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 17
We collapsed the four items measuring intrinsic motivation after reverse coding (α = .90).
An ANOVA revealed a significant effect of reward timing, F(2, 220) = 6.16, p = .002, ηp2 = .05
(See Figure 1). As predicted, an immediate bonus increased intrinsic motivation to pursue the
spot-the-difference task compared with a delayed bonus (Mimmediate = 5.41, SD = 1.04; Mdelayed =
4.97, SD = 1.20), t(220) = 2.26, p = .025, d = .39. An immediate bonus further increased intrinsic
motivation compared with a no-bonus control condition (Mno bonus = 4.74, SD = 1.33), t(220) =
3.45, p < .001, d = .56, with no difference between delayed- and no-bonus conditions, t(220) =
1.18, p = .238, d = .18.
We next analyzed intrinsic motivation using the free-choice paradigm of continued
engagement using a binary logistic regression on choice to continue the task (1 = yes, 0 = no)
that included two dummy predictors for delayed- and no-bonus conditions. As predicted,
participants in the immediate condition were more likely to continue the reading task (84.2%)
compared with those in the delayed (70.3%), B = -.81, 95% CI = [-1.63, -.04], z = -2.01, p =
.044, Odds Ratio (OR) = .44, or no-bonus conditions (52.1%), B = -1.59, 95% CI = [-2.39, -.85],
z = -4.06, p < .001, OR = .20 (see Figure 2). (There was also an unpredicted difference between
the two control conditions (delayed vs. no bonus), B = -.78, 95% CI = [-1.47, -.11], z = -2.25, p =
.024, OR = .46). For a conceptual replication of this study using a different paradigm, see Study
2 in the Supplemental Materials.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 18
Figure 1.
An immediate bonus increased self-reported intrinsic motivation to work on a spot-the-difference
task compared with a delayed bonus or no bonus (Study 3. Error bars represent SEM).
Figure 2.
An immediate bonus increased the likelihood of choosing to continue a spot-the-difference task
with no additional compensation compared with a delayed bonus or no bonus (Study 3).
4.97 5.41 4.74
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Delayed Bonus
($0.60 in a month) Immediate Bonus
($0.60 now) No Bonus
Intrinsic Motivation
* ***
70.3%
84.2%
52.1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Delayed Bonus
($0.60 in a month) Immediate Bonus
($0.60 now) No Bonus
Percentage Continuing the Task
(Intrinsic Motivation)
* ***
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 19
Overall, we found that adding an immediate bonus to a spot-the-difference task increases
intrinsic motivation on self-report and behavioral (the free-choice paradigm) measures compared
with delayed and no bonus conditions. We next tested for the process underlying the effect of
immediate rewards, predicting that immediacy strengthens the activity-goal association, thereby
increasing intrinsic motivation.
Study 4: Immediate versus Delayed Rewards Strengthen the Activity-Goal Association,
Thereby Increasing Intrinsic, but not Extrinsic Motivation
We predicted that an earlier reward would lead an activity to be more closely associated
(i.e., fused) with its goal, which would in turn mediate the effect of immediacy on increased
intrinsic motivation. In Study 4, we accordingly measured the activity-goal association with a
modified version of the self-other overlap scale (Aron, Aron, & Smollan, 1992). Specifically, we
created a set of Venn-like diagrams consisting of two circles—one representing the activity
(reading) and one representing the goal (receiving rewards), with varying degrees of overlap. At
a cognitive level, the activity and the goal become closely associated such that the boundary
between them is blurred, resulting in the selection of more heavily overlapped circles. We
predicted that a reading task offering an immediate bonus would lead to greater perceptual
overlap between reading and receiving bonus rewards, which in turn would increase intrinsic
motivation to read. In addition, we tested for discriminant validity: whether immediate rewards
increase intrinsic motivation (e.g., positive experience), but not extrinsic motivation (e.g.,
perceived outcome importance).
Method
Participants. Basing our sample size on Supplemental Study 2 (n = 60 per cell), we
opened the study for 120 HITs on MTurk. All participants first answered “Have you ever read
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 20
part of the book Big Magic?” Twelve participants indicated yes to this question and were
directed to a separate screen stating “You are not eligible for this study.” A total of 119 workers
indicated no and participated for monetary compensation (Mage = 34.80, SD = 11.32; 57 female;
four participants dropped the survey after random assignment; immediate: n = 2, delayed: n = 2).
Procedure. This study employed a 2 (bonus-reward timing: immediate vs. delayed;
between-participants) × 2 (motivation: intrinsic vs. extrinsic; within-participants) mixed-model
design. All participants worked on the experiment for a fixed payment ($0.40) and learned of a
$0.25 bonus that was tied to completing a reading task. Those in the immediate-reward condition
learned this bonus would be automatically paid out immediately after they finished the reading
task, whereas those in the delayed-reward condition learned the bonus would be automatically
paid to them one month after completing the reading task.
Participants read the first five pages of a book, Big Magic: Creative Living Beyond Fear
by Elizabeth Gilbert. Participants learned the researchers were pilot testing reading material and
that they should “Read each page of the excerpt in its entirety as you will be answering questions
about what you have read at the end of the task.”
After reading the excerpt, participants answered questions assessing their intrinsic
motivation to read the book (from Studies 1-3): “How much did you enjoy reading this book
excerpt?” and “How interesting was this book excerpt to read?” Participants also answered
questions assessing their extrinsic motivation to read the book: “How motivated were you to
receive the outcome by finishing the reading task?” and “How important was it to you to receive
the outcome in this task?” (0 = not at all, 6 = very much). These measures follow from our
definition of extrinsic motivation as motivation to achieve outcomes that result from pursuing an
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 21
activity, and assess outcome-focused motivation (i.e., finishing the task; Brehm & Self, 1989;
Locke & Latham, 1990; Touré-Tillery & Fishbach, 2014; Woolley & Fishbach, 2015).
To capture the degree of overlap between the activity (reading) and the goal (receiving a
bonus reward), we created seven pairs of circles that overlapped to different degrees, from
completely separate (coded as 0) to largely overlapped (coded as 6). One set of circles
represented the activityreadingand the other set of circles represented the goalreceiving
rewards (see Appendix C). Participants read: “Think about the reading task you just worked on.
In your mind, to what extent does “receiving rewards” capture the experience of reading?
Indicate whether the experience of receiving rewards does versus does not closely define the
experience of reading this excerpt” (0 = completely separate circles, 6 = very overlapped
circles). Finally, participants completed a manipulation-check item “When did you expect the
bonus for this study to arrive?” (0 = immediately, 6 = in a long time).
Results and Discussion
Confirming our manipulation, participants in the immediate-reward condition expected
the bonus to arrive earlier than those in the delayed-reward condition (Mimmediate = 2.38, SD =
1.58; Mdelayed = 4.88, SD = 1.46), t(117) = 8.94, p < .001, 95% CIdiff = [1.95, 3.06], d = 1.64.
We collapsed the items measuring intrinsic motivation (enjoyable, good experience; r =
.90) and extrinsic motivation (motivated by outcome, outcome importance; r = .55). A repeated-
measures ANOVA of reward timing (immediate vs. delayed) on motivation (intrinsic vs.
extrinsic) yielded the predicted interaction, F(1, 117) = 7.70, p = .006, ηp2 = .06 (Figure 3), with
no main effect of motivation, F(1, 117) = 1.24, p = .268, ηp2 = .01, or timing F(1, 117) = 1.84, p
= .178, ηp2 = .02. Participants were more intrinsically motivated in the immediate- versus
delayed-reward condition (Mimmediate = 4.72, SD = 1.19; Mdelayed = 4.01, SD = 1.80), t(97.86) =
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 22
2.54, p = .013, 95% CIdiff = [.16, 1.27], d = .47. However, there was no effect of timing on
extrinsic motivation (Mimmediate = 4.47, SD = 1.37; Mdelayed = 4.60, SD = 1.29), t(117) = .56, p =
.578, 95% CIdiff = [-.62, .35, d = .10.
Figure 3.
An immediate (vs. delayed) bonus increased intrinsic, but not extrinsic motivation to read (Study
4. Error bars represent SEM).
Activity-goal association and mediation analysis.
We next analyzed the activity-goal-association measure. As predicted, participants
perceived reading and receiving rewards as more strongly associated in the immediate- versus
delayed-reward condition (Mimmediate = 3.39, SD = 1.71; Mdelayed = 2.57, SD = 1.92), t(117) = 2.48,
p = .015, 95% CIdiff = [.17, 1.48], d = .45.
Moreover, we found that the activity-goal (reading-rewards) association mediated the
effect of reward timing on intrinsic motivation (βindirect = .16, SE = .07; 95% CI = [.04, .32];
based on 10,000 bootstrap samples; Hayes, 2012). Reward timing (immediate vs. delayed)
positively predicted intrinsic motivation (B = .36, 95% CI = [.08, .63], p = .012) and the activity-
goal association (B = .41, 95% CI = [.08, .74], p = .015). Controlling for the activity-goal
4.72 4.47
4.01 4.60
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Intrinsic Motivation Extrinsic Motivation
Reported Motivation
Immediate Bonus
Delayed Bonus
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 23
association reduced the effect of reward timing on intrinsic motivation (B = .20, 95% CI = [-.05,
.45], p = .122), whereas the activity-goal association remained a significant predictor of intrinsic
motivation (B = .38, 95% CI = [.25, .52], p < .001).
This study provided support for the prediction that the strength of the activity-goal
association mediates the effect of reward timing on intrinsic motivation. The earlier delivery of a
reward for reading led people to perceive greater overlap between reading (activity) and
receiving rewards (goal), increasing intrinsic motivation. Moreover, immediate (vs. delayed)
rewards increased intrinsic motivation, but not extrinsic motivation. When a reading task
provided more immediate rewards, participants felt the task provided a greater positive
experience, but did not perceive the task as providing a more valuable outcome.
Study 5: Immediate Rewards Increase Intrinsic Motivation More than Larger Rewards
Does immediacy increase intrinsic motivation only because the magnitude of immediate
rewards is psychologically larger (i.e., through temporal discounting; Ainslie & Haslam, 1992;
Frederick et al., 2002)? To test our account against an explanation based on discounting of
delayed rewards, Study 5 examined the alternative that immediate rewards are more motivating
because they are psychologically larger than delayed rewards. Notably, the results of Study 4 are
already inconsistent with such an alternative because larger rewards should increase both
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, which is opposite our findings. Yet, to better assess whether
reward magnitude underlies the effect of timing, Study 5 independently varied reward timing
(immediate vs. delayed bonus) and reward magnitude (large vs. small bonus) in order to test
whether the effect of timing can be explained in terms of the effect of magnitude. We predicted
that moving the rewards earlier in time would have an independent and stronger effect on
intrinsic motivation than increasing the size of the rewards, which would suggest that the effect
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 24
of timing cannot be explained in terms of higher subjective magnitude of immediate rewards. For
discriminant validity, we again compared the effect on intrinsic motivation to the effect on
extrinsic motivation.
Pilot Test
To compare the motivational impact of a sooner (vs. later) reward with that of a larger
(vs. smaller) reward, we needed to choose differences in delivery times that were comparable to
differences in dollar amounts. Specifically, we wanted participants to indicate that the difference
in the dollar amount of our stimuli was at least as motivating as (or even more motivating than)
the difference in the timing of our stimuli. With that purpose in mind, we used the time
difference from Studies 3-4 (now vs. in one month) and an amount difference of $1.00 ($0.50 vs.
$1.50). We tested whether people prefer to earn an additional $1.00 bonus at least as much as
they prefer to receive a bonus one month earlier. Specifically, if most people prefer to wait a
month to earn $1.00 more on an experiment, we can conclude the difference in amounts we used
is no less (and actually more) motivating than the difference in delivery times.
For our pilot study, we recruited a total of 99 participants on MTurk (Mage = 35.53, SD =
11.09; 55 female; no participants dropped the survey). Participants imagined working on a five-
minute book-reading task in exchange for a $0.25 base payment plus a bonus. We asked, “Which
bonus would you prefer? $0.50 bonus immediately after you complete the task or $1.50 bonus 1
month after you complete the task.” We found that 67.7% (n = 67) of participants preferred the
larger-later bonus, which is greater than chance (z = 3.42, p < .001). Given that the larger-later
bonus was more attractive than the smaller-sooner bonus, we assume that an increase of $1.00 is
no less motivating than delivering the bonus one month earlier. We therefore tested whether
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 25
providing the bonus one month earlier increases intrinsic motivation more than adding $1.00 to
the bonus does.
Method
Participants. We collected data from 206 workers on MTurk who participated for
monetary compensation (Mage = 37.90, SD = 13.26; 115 female; 14 participants dropped the
survey after random assignment; immediate-small: n = 2, immediate-large: n = 3, delayed-small:
n = 5, delayed-large: n = 4).
Procedure. This study employed a 2 (reward timing: immediate vs. delayed; between-
participants) × 2 (reward magnitude: smaller vs. larger; between-participants) × 2 (motivation:
intrinsic vs. extrinsic; within-participants) mixed-model design. Participants received $0.25 for
working on a book-reading task (adopted from Study 4). In the immediate-reward condition,
participants expected a bonus within an hour of finishing the reading task. In the delayed-reward
condition, they expected a bonus one month after finishing the task. We further manipulated the
size of the bonus such that participants expected to receive either a smaller $0.50 bonus or a
larger $1.50 bonus.
Participants read the five-page book excerpt from Study 4 and then answered questions
assessing their intrinsic motivation to read the book: “How interesting was this book excerpt for
you to read?” and “How much did you enjoy reading this book excerpt?” (1 = not very
interesting/did not enjoy, 7 = very interesting/enjoyed very much). We also assessed their
extrinsic motivation: “How motivated were you to finish the reading task?” and “How important
was it to you to receive the outcome?” (1 = not very motivated/important, 7 = very
motivated/important).
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 26
To measure intrinsic motivation with the free-choice paradigm, participants learned two
minutes remained in the study, and in this time, they could continue reading the book excerpt or
complete another task. All participants read that no additional bonuses were available for the
remainder of the study. Participants chose to continue reading or to work on something else, and
spent two minutes on the selected task (reading task or dot-counting task).
Results and Discussion
A repeated-measures ANOVA of intrinsic motivation (enjoy, interesting; r = .91) and
extrinsic motivation (motivated by outcome, outcome importance; r = .67) on reward timing
(immediate vs. delayed) and reward magnitude (small vs. large) resulted in a three-way
interaction, F(1, 202) = 5.08, p = .025, ηp2 = .02. To explore the three-way interaction, we
examined the timing × magnitude interaction for intrinsic and extrinsic motivation measures
separately. An ANOVA of intrinsic motivation revealed the predicted effect of reward timing,
F(1, 202) = 5.74, p = .017, ηp2 = .03, with no effect of reward magnitude, F(1, 202) = 1.86, p =
.175, or interaction, F(1, 202) = 1.22, p = .272. Immediate (vs. delayed) rewards increased
intrinsic motivation (Mimmediate = 6.01, SD = 1.15; Mdelayed = 5.58, SD = 1.43).
An ANOVA of extrinsic motivation on reward timing and magnitude revealed no
significant effect of reward timing, F(1, 202) = 1.21, p = .273, reward magnitude, F(1, 202) =
1.63, p = .204, or interaction, F(1, 202) = .80, p = .371. Whereas more immediate rewards
increased intrinsic motivation (positive experience), they once again had no similar effect on
extrinsic motivation (outcome importance).
We next analyzed intrinsic motivation using our free-choice measure. We regressed
choice (1 = continue reading; 0 = other task) on reward timing (1 = immediate; 0 = delayed),
magnitude (1 = $0.50; 0 = $1.50) and their interaction, revealing no interaction, B = -.31, 95% CI
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 27
= [-1.51, .86], z = -.52, p = .603, OR = .73. Examining main effects of timing and magnitude, as
predicted, participants in the immediate reward condition were more likely to continue the
reading task (73.3%) compared with the delayed reward condition (54.5%), B = .84, 95% CI =
[.26, 1.44], z = 2.80, p = .005, OR = 2.32 (Figure 4). There was a marginal effect of magnitude, B
= -.50, 95% CI = -1.09, .09], z = -1.66, p = .097, OR = .61.
Figure 4.
An immediate bonus reward increased the likelihood of choosing to continue to read compared
with a delayed bonus reward, with no effect of the magnitude of the bonus on choice (Study 5).
Overall, results of Study 5 suggest it is unlikely that immediate rewards increase intrinsic
motivation because they appear psychologically larger. Larger rewards did not significantly
increase intrinsic motivation. In addition, we replicated the results of Study 4, where an earlier
reward increased intrinsic, but not extrinsic motivation.
Notably, the magnitude of the reward could also potentially influence intrinsic
motivation. On the one hand, consistent with the overjustification effect (Lepper et al., 1973), a
larger payment may lead participants to infer that a task will be less pleasant and fun, decreasing
intrinsic motivation. On the other hand, consistent with animal conditioning research, a larger
66.7%
50.0%
79.6%
58.8%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Immediate Bonus Delayed Bonus
Percent Continuing Reading Task
(Intrinsic Motivation)
Small Bonus ($0.50)
Large Bonus ($1.50)
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 28
reward could increase association strength between the activity and the outcome, leading to
increased intrinsic motivation (Hull, 1943; Rescorla & Wagner, 1972). Possibly, these two
effects cancelled each other out, such that the size of the reward did not influence intrinsic
motivation in either direction. Alternatively, in Study 5, the size of the reward did not influence
intrinsic motivation because participants were unaware their payment was large, a point
discussed further in the General Discussion.
General Discussion
Across five studies and two supplemental studies, we provide evidence that immediate
rewards increase intrinsic motivation by strengthening the activity-goal association. People were
more intrinsically motivated to watch a news clip after framing the rewards for doing so as
arriving immediately (vs. with a delay; Study 1), and they were more intrinsically motivated to
complete an experimental task that provided an immediate (vs. delayed) chocolate reward (Study
2) or immediate monetary bonus (vs. delayed or no bonus; Study 3).
We further found immediate rewards increase intrinsic motivation by strengthening the
activity-goal association (Study 4), and that temporal discounting is not part of the process.
Whereas delayed rewards can be psychologically smaller, a larger reward did not increase
intrinsic motivation as much as an earlier reward did (Study 5). Moreover, the effect of timing
was unique to intrinsic (vs. extrinsic) motivation (discriminant validity, Studies 4-5). Indeed,
immediate rewards rendered the experience of pursuing an activity more positive, but did not
render the outcome of the activity as more important.
Our findings support the means-ends fusion model of intrinsic motivation (Kruglanski et
al., in press), though unlike previous research (e.g., Fishbach et al., 2004), the source of the
association between an activity and a goal was the temporal proximity. Our model, and the
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 29
structural perspective it offers, differs from yet complements research on self-determination
theory (SDT), which identified certain contents that tend to be intrinsically motivating (Ryan &
Deci, 2000). SDT proposes that intrinsic actions serve at least one of three end goals: autonomy,
competence, and relatedness. We argue that SDT’s three goal domains provide instances in
which a strong association exists between an activity and its goal. For example, medical students
who were given more autonomy when learning were more intrinsically motivated (Williams &
Deci, 1996) because learning and becoming autonomous were strongly associated for them
they felt autonomous while learning as opposed to after some delay. Indeed, in our research, we
adopted SDT measures of intrinsic motivation (Ryan, 1982) to test our predictions.
Where our work may appear to diverge from prior work (e.g., by Lepper, 1981; Lepper &
Greene, 1978) is that we found extrinsic rewards, such as bonuses, increase rather than decrease
intrinsic motivation. Whereas the previously documented overjustification effect surfaces when
the association between an activity and its goal is weakened through the provision of an
additional goal, our research compares intrinsic motivation in a rewarded activity where
everyone expects a reward (e.g., a paid job), and we vary the reward timing. In such cases, the
presence of a reward does not decrease the experience of an activity as intrinsically motivated,
and we can test for the effect of reward timing. Only in Study 3 did we add a no-bonus condition,
yet everyone received a reward for the activity (i.e., a paid experiment), and as such, the
presence of a bonus did not crowd out intrinsic motivation.
Our findings are further relevant to research on conditioning, which has demonstrated
how the association between an activity and a reward can facilitate liking of the rewarded task
even after removing the reward (De Houwer et al., 2001; Razran, 1954). Specifically, evaluative
conditioning is concerned with changes in the evaluation response to a conditioned stimulus (CS)
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 30
in response to the CS being temporally and/or spatially paired with an unconditioned stimulus
(US; Hofmann, De Houwer, Perugini, Baeyens, & Crombez, 2010; Rozin & Zellner, 1985).
Unlike Pavlovian conditioning, which addresses changes in any type of response (e.g., salivation,
skin conductance), evaluative conditioning is specific to changes in liking (De Houwer, 2007;
Walther, 2002). Our results are consistent with an explanation based on evaluative conditioning,
except that we measured intrinsic motivation instead of general evaluation and we did not find
effects on extrinsic motivation measures. This finding suggests the immediacy of rewards does
not condition participants to evaluate a task as more positive in general (e.g., as providing more
important outcomes), but rather, as more intrinsically motivating.
Finally, our results are relevant to research on the effect of immediate rewards on
increased goal persistence (Acland & Levy, 2015; John et al., 2011; Volpp et al., 2008; Woolley
& Fishbach, 2016). For example, associating immediate rewards, such as listening to a popular
novel, with a workout increased exercise frequency (Milkman, Minson, & Volpp, 2013). Our
research suggests immediate (vs. delayed) rewards boost persistence by increasing intrinsic
motivation, such that the activity itself is more enjoyable. Indeed, research examining ways to
counteract self-control depletion found that after engaging in a depleting task, associating the
task with financial incentives (Boksem, Meijman, & Lorist, 2006) or with an immediately
rewarding experience (Derrick, 2013; Friese, Messner, & Schaffner, 2012), bolstered subsequent
self-control. Possibly immediate rewards improve performance by increasing intrinsic
motivation.
Boundary Conditions, Limitations, and Open Questions
Possibly, immediate rewards increase intrinsic motivation by changing the meaning of
the activity. For example, people pursuing exercise for an immediate reward may envision
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 31
exercising as “running + watching TV” instead of just “running.” Indeed, the meaning of
activities is fluid, dynamic, and consists of associative networks for how people construe a given
activity within a given context (Anderson & Pirolli, 1984; Collins & Loftus, 1975), and one
consequence of having a close activity-goal association is that positive properties of goal
attainment bleed into and come to color the experience of pursuing the rewarded activity
(Fishbach et al., 2004). Although it is possible reflecting on immediate rewards could change the
meaning of the activity, what is critical for our analysis is that in our studies, rewards did not
change the behaviors people actually engaged in when pursuing the activity (e.g., those who
received an immediate chocolate reward when completing a survey were not eating chocolate
while completing the survey). Thus, whereas immediate rewards may sometimes change the
meaning of the activity, they do not change what people do.
It is also worth distinguishing the effect of reward immediacy from that of misattribution.
Misattribution occurs when task irrelevant stimuli (e.g., pleasant images, music, and room
temperature while performing the task) color one’s experience such that the task appears more
intrinsically motivating (e.g., Leander, Kay, Chartrand, & Payne, 2017). Importantly, however,
the reward for a task is not an irrelevant stimulus; rather, the reward is the goal of the task.
Therefore, people correctly attribute (rather than incorrectly misattribute) the reward (i.e., the
goal) to the task (i.e., the means). The variable that predicts intrinsic motivation is the strength of
the means-ends (activity-goal) association and the psychological processes that explain the
strength of this association are conditioning and emotional transfer, which lead the positive
aspects of goal attainment to become associated with the activity (Fishbach et al., 2004). For
example, the excitement associated with the bonus rewards, which is correctly attributed to
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 32
completing the task, transfers to the experience of pursuing the activity as a function of the
activity-goal association.
A potential alternative explanation for the effect of immediacy is that closer rewards can
be psychologically larger, due to temporal discounting and, therefore, immediate rewards are
motivating because they are larger. We note that in Study 5, we compared more immediate
rewards to larger rewards and found only immediate rewards increased intrinsic motivation. Yet,
this test requires that the differences in timing are similar to the differences in magnitude of
rewards. And whereas our pilot test identified people were more sensitive to differences in dollar
amounts (i.e., $0.50 vs. $1.50) than differences in delivery time (i.e., today vs. a month), it is
possible participants need a reference point for evaluating reward magnitude (but less so to
evaluate reward timing). We further believe it is possible that larger rewards do indeed increase
intrinsic motivationit is only less likely that such an effect of reward magnitude accounted for
the effect of reward timing we observed in our studies.
A boundary condition could refer to savoring behavior. There are situations where people
prefer to delay consumption, such as savoring the anticipation of a future event like a vacation or
drinking a bottle of nice wine (Loewenstein, 1987). It is possible in these situations that
immediacy would not be desirable and would not serve to increase intrinsic motivation.
In addition to exploring alternative explanations and boundary conditions, open questions
include what other variables affect the experience of fusion between an activity and its goal, and
thus can foster intrinsic motivation. In particular, perceived similarity, or fit, between an activity
and its goal can strengthen their association (Higgins, 2000; Higgins, Idson, Freitas, Spiegel, &
Molden, 2003). Indeed, anticipated and actual enjoyment of an activity increased as the fit
between the activity and people’s regulatory focus increased (Freitas & Higgins, 2002),
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 33
potentially by increasing intrinsic motivation. One would predict that a more fitting goal (e.g., a
free water bottle for those signing up for an exercise class) might increase intrinsic motivation
compared with a less fitting goal (e.g., a free soda for an exercise class).
Although we provide initial insight into the role of immediacy in increasing intrinsic
motivation, the present work is not without limitations. First, we relied on the modified IOS scale
in providing evidence for the process underlying the effect of immediacythat immediacy
strengthens the activity-goal association, which in turn increases intrinsic motivation. Future
research should examine other means of assessing this association (e.g., implicit measures).
Second, we relied on online, MTurk paradigms. Although online paradigms are ideal for
manipulating temporal distance separately from spatial distance, a limitation of using online paid
workers is that results may differ for people that like their job more or who are not paid at all.
Finally, delayed rewards may appear less reliable or certain than immediate rewards, although
notably, we worked to mitigate this, for example, by explicitly stating that bonus rewards would
be automatically delivered and by using online payments where there are not costs associated
with needing to remember to cash the reward. This limitation is inherent to studies with temporal
delays, and is not unique to our paradigms, yet to the extent that any discounting procedure
evokes uncertainty about the availability of future rewards, the present research too could have
unintentionally manipulated uncertainty in rewards.
In summary, we found immediacy increases intrinsic motivation by strengthening the
activity-goal association. The temporal distance between an activity and its goal matters and so,
to be intrinsically motivated to finish this article, it would be ideal to consider the benefits of
reading as immediate, rather than delayed.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 34
References
Acland, D., & Levy, M. R. (2015). Naiveté, projection bias, and habit formation in gym
attendance. Management Science, 61(1), 146-160.
Ainslie, G., & Haslam, N. (1992). Hyperbolic discounting. In G. Loewenstein & J. Elster (Eds.),
Choice over time (pp. 57-92). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Anderson, J. R., & Pirolli, P. L. (1984). Spread of activation. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10(4), 791-798.
Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the
structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4),
596-612.
Balsam, P. D., Drew, M. R., & Gallistel, C. R. (2010). Time and associative learning.
Comparative Cognition & Behavior Reviews, 5, 1-22.
Bélanger, J. J., Schori-Eyal, N., Pica, G., Kruglanski, A. W., & Lafrenière, M. A. (2015). The
“more is less” effect in equifinal structures: Alternative means reduce the intensity and
quality of motivation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 60, 93-102.
Boakes, R. A., & Costa, D. S. (2014). Temporal contiguity in associative learning: Interference
and decay from an historical perspective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal
Learning and Cognition, 40(4), 381-400.
Boksem, M. A., Meijman, T. F., & Lorist, M. M. (2006). Mental fatigue, motivation and action
monitoring. Biological Psychology, 72(2), 123-132.
Brehm, J. W., & Self, E. A. (1989). The intensity of motivation. Annual review of Psychology,
40(1), 109-131.
Calder, B. J., & Staw, B. M. (1975). Self-perception of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 35
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(4), 599-605.
Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing.
Psychological Review, 82(6), 407-428.
De Houwer, J. (2007). A conceptual and theoretical analysis of evaluative conditioning. The
Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10(2), 230-241.
De Houwer, J., Thomas, S., & Baeyens, F. (2001). Association learning of likes and dislikes: A
review of 25 years of research on human evaluative conditioning. Psychological
Bulletin, 127(6), 853-869.
Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 18(1), 105-115.
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments
examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin,
125(6), 627-668.
Derrick, J. L. (2013). Energized by television familiar fictional worlds restore self-control. Social
Psychological and Personality Science, 4(3), 299-307.
Dickinson, A. (1980). Contemporary animal learning theory. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Eisenberger, R., & Cameron, J. (1996). Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?
American Psychologist, 51(11), 1153-116.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical
power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior
Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191.
Fishbach, A., & Choi, J. (2012). When thinking about goals undermines goal pursuit.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 36
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 118(2), 99-107.
Fishbach, A., Shah, J. Y., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2004). Emotional transfer in goal systems.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(6), 723-738.
Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O'Donoghue, T. (2002). Time discounting and time
preference: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2), 351-401.
Freitas, A. L., & Higgins, E. T. (2002). Enjoying goal-directed action: The role of regulatory
fit. Psychological Science, 13(1), 1-6.
Friese, M., Messner, C., & Schaffner, Y. (2012). Mindfulness meditation counteracts self-control
depletion. Consciousness and Cognition, 21(2), 1016-1022.
Goswami, I., & Urminsky, O. (2017). The dynamic effect of incentives on post-reward task
engagement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146(1), 1-19.
Harackiewicz, J. M. (1979). The effects of reward contingency and performance feedback on
intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(8), 1352-1363.
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation,
moderation, and conditional process modeling. Retrieved from
www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
Heath, C. (1999). On the social psychology of agency relationships: Lay theories of motivation
overemphasize extrinsic incentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 78(1), 25-62.
Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55(11),
1217-1230.
Higgins, E. T., Idson, L. C., Freitas, A. L., Spiegel, S., & Molden, D. C. (2003). Transfer of
value from fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1140-1153.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 37
Higgins, E. T., Lee, J., Kwon, J., & Trope, Y. (1995). When combining intrinsic motivations
undermines interest: a test of activity engagement theory. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 68(5), 749-767.
Higgins, E. T., & Trope, Y. (1990). Activity engagement theory: Implications of multiply
identifiable input for intrinsic motivation. In: R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins, (Eds.),
Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (pp. 229-264).
New York: Guildford Press.
Higgins, E. T., Trope, Y., & Kwon, J. (1999). Augmentation and undermining from combining
activities: The role of choice in activity engagement theory. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 35(3), 285-307.
Hofmann, W., De Houwer, J., Perugini, M., Baeyens, F., & Crombez, G. (2010). Evaluative
conditioning in humans: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 390-421.
Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior: An introduction to behavior theory. New York, NY:
Appleton-Century-Crofts.
John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., Troxel, A. B., Norton, L., Fassbender, J. E., & Volpp, K. G.
(2011). Financial incentives for extended weight loss: A randomized, controlled
trial. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 26(6), 621-626.
Kruglanski, A. W., Alon, S., & Lewis, T. (1972). Retrospective misattribution and task
enjoyment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 8(6), 493-501.
Kruglanski, A. W., Fishbach, A., Woolley, K., Bélanger, J., Chernikova, M., Molinario, E., &
Pierro, A. (in press). A structural model of intrinsic motivation: On the psychology of
means-ends fusion, Psychological Review.
Kruglanski, A. W., Riter, A., Amitai, A., Margolin, B. S., Shabtai, L., & Zaksh, D. (1975). Can
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 38
money enhance intrinsic motivation? A test of the content-consequence hypothesis.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(4), 744-750.
Lafrenière, M. A. K., Bélanger, J. J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Vallerand, R. J. (2011). Goal-means
associations and intrinsic motivation. Manuscript in preparation.
Leander, N. P., Kay, A. C., Chartrand, T. L., & Payne, B. K. (2017). An Affect Misattribution
Pathway to Perceptions of Intrinsic Reward. Social Cognition, 35(2), 163-180.
Lepper, M. R. (1981). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in children: Detrimental effects of
superfluous social controls. In W. A. Collins (Ed.). Aspects of the development of
competence: Minnesota symposium on child psychology (Vol. 14, pp. 155–213).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lepper, M. R., & Greene, D. (1978). The hidden costs of rewards: New perspectives on the
psychology of human motivation, Oxford, England: Erlbaum.
Lepper, M. R., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1973). Undermining children's intrinsic interest
with extrinsic reward: A test of the "overjustification" hypothesis. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 28(1), 129-137.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). Work motivation and satisfaction: Light at the end of the
tunnel. Psychological Science, 1(4), 240-246.
Loewenstein, G. (1987). Anticipation and the valuation of delayed consumption. The Economic
Journal, 97(387), 666-684.
Maimaran, M., & Fishbach, A. (2014). If it's useful and you know it, do you eat? Preschoolers
refrain from instrumental food. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(3), 642-655.
McAllister, W. R. (1953). Eyelid conditioning as a function of the CS-US interval. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 45(6), 417-422.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 39
McAuley, E., Duncan, T., & Tammen, V. V. (1989). Psychometric properties of the Intrinsic
Motivation Inventory in a competitive sport setting: A confirmatory factor
analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 60(1), 48-58.
Milkman, K. L., Minson, J. A., & Volpp, K. G. (2013). Holding the Hunger Games hostage at
the gym: An evaluation of temptation bundling. Management Science, 60(2), 283-299.
Milyavskaya, M., Inzlicht, M., Hope, N., & Koestner, R. (2015). Saying “no” to temptation:
Want-to motivation improves self-regulation by reducing temptation rather than by
increasing self-control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(4), 677-693.
Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Rodriguez, M. I. (1989). Delay of gratification in children. Science,
244(4907), 933-938.
Orehek, E., Mauro, R., Kruglanski, A. W., & van der Bles, A. M. (2012). Prioritizing association
strength versus value: The influence of self-regulatory modes on means evaluation in
single goal and multigoal contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(1),
22-31.
Razran, G. (1954). The conditioned evocation of attitudes (cognitive conditioning?). Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 48(4), 278-282.
Reeve, J., Jang, H., Hardre, P., & Omura, M. (2002). Providing a rationale in an autonomy-
supportive way as a strategy to motivate others during an uninteresting activity.
Motivation and Emotion, 26(3), 183-207.
Reeve, J., Nix, G., & Hamm, D. (2003). Testing models of the experience of self-determination
in intrinsic motivation and the conundrum of choice. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 95(2), 375-392.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 40
Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the
effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. Classical conditioning II: Current
research and theory, 2, 64-99.
Rheinberg, F. (2008). Intrinsic motivation and flow. In J. Heckhausen & H. Heckhausen
(Eds.), Motivation and Action, (pp. 323-348), Cambridge, UK: University Press.
Rozin, P., & Zellner, D. (1985). The role of Pavlovian conditioning in the acquisition of food
likes and dislikes. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 443(1), 189-202.
Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of
cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(3), 450-
461.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
Sansone, C., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). “I don’t feel like it”: The function of interest in self-
regulation. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), Striving and feeling: Interactions among
goals, affect, and self-regulation (pp. 203-228). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schwartz, B., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2016). Internal motivation, instrumental motivation, and
eudaimonia. In J. Vitterso (Ed.), Handbook of eudaimonic well-being (pp. 123-134). New
York: Springer International Publishing.
Tang, S. H., & Hall, V. C. (1995). The overjustification effect: A meta-analysis. Applied
Cognitive Psychology, 9(5), 365-404.
TouréTillery, M., & Fishbach, A. (2014). How to measure motivation: A guide for the
experimental social psychologist. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8(7), 328-
341.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 41
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 271-360.
Volpp, K. G., John, L. K., Troxel, A. B., Norton, L., Fassbender, J., & Loewenstein, G. (2008).
Financial incentive–based approaches for weight loss: a randomized trial. JAMA,
300(22), 2631-2637.
Walther, E. (2002). Guilty by mere association: Evaluative conditioning and the spreading
attitude effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 919-934.
Williams, G. C., & Deci, E. L. (1996). Internalization of biopsychosocial values by medical
students: a test of self-determination theory. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 70(4), 767-779.
Wolfle, H. M. (1932). Conditioning as a function of the interval between the conditioned and the
original stimulus. The Journal of General Psychology, 7(1), 80-103.
Woolley, K., & Fishbach, A. (2016). For the fun of it: Harnessing immediate rewards to
increase persistence in long-term goals. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(6), 952-966.
Woolley, K., & Fishbach, A. (2015). The Experience Matters More Than You Think: People
Value Intrinsic Incentives More Inside Than Outside an Activity. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 109, 968-982.
Wrzesniewski, A., Schwartz, B., Cong, X., Kane, M., Omar, A., & Kolditz, T. (2014). Multiple
types of motives don't multiply the motivation of West Point cadets. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 111(30), 10990-10995.
Zhang, Y., Fishbach, A., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2007). The dilution model: how additional goals
undermine the perceived instrumentality of a shared path. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 92(3), 389-401.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 42
Zhou, H., & Fishbach, A. (2016). The pitfall of experimenting on the web: How unattended
selective attrition leads to surprising (yet false) research conclusions. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 111(4), 493-504.
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 43
Author Note
This article is based on the first author’s dissertation. The authors would like to thank Jane L.
Risen, Ann L. McGill, and Oleg Urminsky for their helpful feedback. The raw data for all studies
are available in an online data repository (osf.io/yhw85).
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 44
Appendix A
Survey from Study 2:
Participants completed a five-minute survey during which they imagined meeting and getting
acquainted with a new friend. They read, “This person can tell you things about themselves in
order for you to get to know them better. Please read the statements below that your new friend
could tell you and think about how you will view your friend based on these statements”: (1)
“Imagine your new friend tells you they are taking an elective class on computer programming to
gain useful professional connections,” (2) “Imagine your new friend tells you they read news
articles to get conversation topics to discuss with others,” and (3) “Imagine your new friend tells
you they own a nice cookbook to impress people with their meals.” For each statement,
participants answered two questions: “How well will you know your new friend after learning
they engaged in this activity?” (0 = know less, 6 = know more) and “How much will you like
your new friend after learning they engaged in this activity?” (0 = like less, 6 = like more).
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 45
Appendix B
Spot-the-difference task from Study 3:
Immediacy Increases Intrinsic Motivation 46
Appendix C
Measure of activity-goal association used in Study 4.
... Different motivational mechanisms operate not only alone but in combination with each other to influence overall motivation and direct behavior (Schwartz and Wrzesniewski, 2016;Woolley and Fishbach, 2018). One of the main challenges of the motivation literature is to examine the dynamics of such interactions and their effect on overall motivation (i.e., the sum of different types of motivations) and performance (Bonner and Sprinkle, 2002;Cerasoli et al., 2014;Goswami and Urminsky, 2017;Wowak et al., 2017;Woolley and Fishbach, 2018;Hendijani and Steel, 2020). ...
... Different motivational mechanisms operate not only alone but in combination with each other to influence overall motivation and direct behavior (Schwartz and Wrzesniewski, 2016;Woolley and Fishbach, 2018). One of the main challenges of the motivation literature is to examine the dynamics of such interactions and their effect on overall motivation (i.e., the sum of different types of motivations) and performance (Bonner and Sprinkle, 2002;Cerasoli et al., 2014;Goswami and Urminsky, 2017;Wowak et al., 2017;Woolley and Fishbach, 2018;Hendijani and Steel, 2020). Among these, the combined effect of external reward and choice has been particularly controversial (Patall et al., 2008;Hendijani, 2021). ...
... According to these theories' prediction, the provision of reward along with other intrinsic motivational mechanisms (e.g., the provision of choice) can mitigate their positive effects and diminish motivation (Patall et al., 2008). While empirical studies (Lepper et al., 1973) and meta-analytical reviews (Deci et al., 1999) have supported these theories' predictions, there are several moderating factors related to the design and implementation of these studies which could influence the results and make them difficult to interpret (Cameron et al., 2001;Cameron and Pierce, 2002;Madden et al., 2013;Woolley and Fishbach, 2018). The use of games instead of real-world tasks (e.g., Enzle and Ross, 1978;Hamner and Foster, 1975) and reward salience (e.g., Deci, 1971;Lepper et al., 1973;Calder and Staw, 1975;Anderson et al., 1976) are two commonly addressed design issues related to these studies that confound the results and limit their interpretations (Hendijani et al., 2016;Woolley and Fishbach, 2018). ...
Article
Full-text available
One of the challenges in the motivation literature is examining the simultaneous effect of different motivational mechanisms on overall motivation and performance. The motivational congruence theory addresses this by stipulating that different motivational mechanisms can reinforce each other if they have similar effects on the perceived locus of causality. Reward salience and choice are two motivational mechanisms which their joint effects have been long debated. Built upon the motivational congruence effect, a recent empirical study affirms that a salient reward in a condition characterized by lack of choice and a non-salient reward in a condition characterized by provision of choice both increase overall motivation and performance. In this study, we examine the effect of reward salience and choice on overall motivation and performance in a controlling context, an effect which has not been studied before. A 2 (choice: present, absent) × 3 (reward: salient, non-salient, none) factorial design was conducted to examine research hypotheses. The results show that under controlling conditions, salient reward improves overall motivation and performance compared to non-salient and no-reward conditions.
... Another perspective is the "enhancing account," which states that the undermining effect of external rewards on intrinsic motivation can be avoided and that external rewards may even enhance intrinsic motivation (Eisenberger and Cameron, 1996;Goswami and Urminsky, 2017). This perspective is also supported by several experimental studies, especially a recent study by Woolley and Fishbach (2018). The research found that giving extra rewards immediately after completing a task significantly promotes participants' intrinsic motivation and raises their enthusiasm and interest in activities compared with delayed rewards, which firmly supported the "enhancing account" perspective. ...
... Woolley and her colleagues attempted to clarify the influence of reward timing (immediate rewards vs. delayed rewards) on intrinsic motivation. The results showed that compared with delayed rewards or no rewards, paying extra rewards immediately may significantly enhance individuals' intrinsic motivation (Woolley and Fishbach, 2018). Although their findings provided strong support for the "enhancing account" perspective that external incentives enhance intrinsic motivation, their study did not rule out the potential effect of the misattribution of extrinsic motivation. ...
... Adapted Intrinsic Motivation Inventory. Combined with the present study, we adapted the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI) revised by Woolley and Fishbach (2018) and used the new inventory to measure the intrinsic motivation level of participants. This inventory measured the intensity of participants' intrinsic motivation in reading activities from the interest-enjoyment dimension, including six items. ...
Article
Full-text available
Researchers have conducted many studies on the relationship between external rewards and intrinsic motivation. A recent study showed that, compared with delayed rewards, rewards delivered immediately after the experiment enhanced the participants’ intrinsic motivation. However, this study did not rule out the possibility of a misattribution effect of extrinsic motivation. The present research conducted three studies to explore whether immediate rewards actually enhance intrinsic motivation. To rule out the interference of the misattribution effect of extrinsic motivation, according to the different characteristics of extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation, Study 1 and Study 2 improved the prior experimental paradigm, and the results indicated that the intrinsic motivation of participants who received extra rewards immediately after completing experimental tasks was stronger than that of participants who received the delayed extra reward. Furthermore, to rule out the potential interference of temporal discounting, Study 3 introduced a new variable—reward magnitude. The results showed that the delivery time of the extra reward had an independent effect on intrinsic motivation and that the immediacy of the extra reward could enhance intrinsic motivation. In all, the three studies strongly demonstrated that immediate external extra rewards could truly enhance intrinsic motivation.
... Scholars utilize this multidimensional approach because intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are unique predictors of important work outcomes (Gagné & Deci, 2005;Glynn, 1994;Woolley & Fishbach, 2018). Supporting this view, Woolley and Fishbach (2017) found that intrinsic and extrinsic motivation differentially predict people's persistence in behaviors such as studying and exercising. ...
... Job characteristic theory further identifies how specific job characteristics, such as skill variety, positively shape motivation because they satisfy innate psychological needs, such as autonomy (Hackman & Oldham, 1976); thus activities within these jobs lead people to feel more intrinsically motivated. Similarly, people who pursue an activity because it is something they want to do are considered more intrinsically motivated than those who pursue an activity because they feel they have to (Woolley & Fishbach, 2018). ...
... We then test our underlying process in two studies, in line with recommendations from prior research (Spencer et al., 2005; see also Vancouver & Carlson, 2015) In some studies, we also examine extrinsic motivation (i.e., Studies 1-3 and 6b assess identified regulation: pursuing activities to attain valued career goals; Studies 2-3 and 6c assess external regulation: pursuing activities for purely external, often financial, rewards). We measure extrinsic motivation as in prior motivation research, which at times contrasts intrinsic motivation with extrinsic motivation (Gagné & Deci, 2005;Woolley & Fishbach, 2018). However, given that our focus is on intrinsic motivation, we return to discuss consequences for extrinsic motivation in the General Discussion. ...
Article
Full-text available
How do people’s perceptions about when they work affect their intrinsic motivation? We find that working during non-standard work time (weekends/holidays) versus standard work time (Monday-Friday, 9-to-5) undermines people’s intrinsic motivation for their professional and academic pursuits. Working during non-standard work time decreases intrinsic motivation by causing people to consider better uses of their time. That is, people generate more upward counterfactual thoughts, which mediates the effect of work time on reduced intrinsic motivation. As a causal test of this process, increasing consideration of upward counterfactuals during standard work time reduces intrinsic motivation, whereas decreasing consideration of upward counterfactuals during non-standard work time helps employees and students maintain intrinsic motivation for their professional and academic pursuits. Overall, we identify a novel determinant of intrinsic motivation and address a real challenge many people face: How changing work schedules affect interest and enjoyment of work, with important consequences for work outcomes.
... Our proposal draws inspiration from the disparate fields of social psychology and artificial intelligence, which have converged on similar ideas with relevance to flow. Social psychologists have developed the concept of means-ends fusion to explain what makes some activities more intrinsically interesting than others [13][14][15][16][17] . The idea is that intrinsic interest emerges from mental associations between desired end states (e.g., bowling a strike) and means of attaining them (e.g., rolling a ball); the more a means and end are associated-or fused-the more interest the means evokes. ...
Article
Full-text available
Flow is a subjective state characterized by immersion and engagement in one’s current activity. The benefits of flow for productivity and health are well-documented, but a rigorous description of the flow-generating process remains elusive. Here we develop and empirically test a theory of flow’s computational substrates: the informational theory of flow. Our theory draws on the concept of mutual information, a fundamental quantity in information theory that quantifies the strength of association between two variables. We propose that the mutual information between desired end states and means of attaining them — I(M;E) — gives rise to flow. We support our theory across five experiments (four preregistered) by showing, across multiple activities, that increasing I(M;E) increases flow and has important downstream benefits, including enhanced attention and enjoyment. We rule out alternative constructs including alternative metrics of associative strength, psychological constructs previously shown to predict flow, and various forms of instrumental value. Flow is a desired but elusive state characterized by the subjective experience of immersion and engagement in an activity. Here, the authors develop and empirically validate a formal model that specifies variables and computations involved in the subjective experience of flow.
... Moreover, according to a recent study by Cornell researchers Woolley and Fishbach (2018), people who received immediate, frequent rewards for completing small tasks reported more interest and enjoyment in their work than people who received delayed rewards only given out at the end of a long project. According to the study, people who receive numerous incentives after finishing a task will remain "intrinsically motivated" to perform well and complete activities even after no reward is available. ...
Article
Full-text available
In contrast to extensive research examining intrinsic motivation in educational and professional settings, the present research investigates the origin, and the development, of the intrinsic motivation to participate in a novel leisure activity. One survey and three experiments show that the enjoyment of a novel leisure activity, and the desire to reengage in the activity, are a function of the alignment between the goal associated with participation and a person’s implicit theory about the skills needed to participate. A mastery goal promotes the development of intrinsic motivation when two conditions are met: (1) people believe their skills are malleable, and (2) first-time participation in the activity results in perceptions of improved mastery. A performance goal promotes the development of intrinsic motivation when two conditions are met: (1) people believe their skills are fixed, and (2) first-time participation in the activity results in perceptions of successful performance. The motivational benefits aligning participation goals and implicit theories are reversed when the execution of a first-time leisure activity is exceedingly difficult.
Article
Background Continuing professional development (CPD) for opioid agonist therapy (OAT) has been identified as a key health policy strategy to improve care for people living with opioid use disorder (OUD) and to address rising opioid-related harms. To design and deliver effective CPD programs, there is a need to clarify how they work within complex health system and policy contexts. This review synthesizes the literature on OAT CPD programs and educational theory to clarify which interventions work, for whom, and in what contexts. Methods A systematic review and realist synthesis of evaluations of CPD programs focused on OAT was conducted. This included record identification and screening, theory familiarization, data collection, analysis, expert consultation, and iterative context-intervention-mechanism-outcome (CIMO) configuration development. Results Twenty-four reports comprising 21 evaluation studies from 5 countries for 3373 providers were reviewed. Through iterative testing of included studies with relevant theory, five CIMO configurations were developed. The programs were categorized by who drove the learning outcomes (i.e., system/policy, instructor, learner) and their spheres of influence (i.e., micro, meso, macro). There was a predominance of instructor-driven programs driving change at the micro level, with few policy-driven macro-influential programs, inconsistent with the promotion of CPD as a clear opioid crisis policy-level intervention. Conclusion OAT CPD is challenged by mismatches in program justifications, objectives, activities, and outcomes. Depending on how these program factors interact, OAT CPD can operate as a barrier or facilitator to OUD care. With more deliberate planning and consideration of program theory, programs more directly addressing diverse learner and system needs may be developed and delivered. OAT CPD as drug policy does not operate in isolation; programs may feed into each other and intercalate with other policy initiatives to have micro, meso, and macro impacts on educational and population health outcomes.
Decreasing radiology reimbursement is a major challenge faced by academic radiology practices in the United States. The consequent increased workload from reading more radiological studies can lead to job dissatisfaction, burnout and adverse impact on research, innovation, and education. Thriving successfully in an academic practice despite low reimbursement requires modification of radiology business models and culture of the practice. In this article, we review the financial and operational strategies to mitigate low reimbursement and strategies for thriving in academic radiology without burnout.
Article
Objective: To investigate the association between the number of pushing contractions and the likelihood of spontaneous vaginal delivery, operative vaginal delivery, cesarean delivery and maternal and neonatal complications. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of patients who entered the second stage of labor with singleton, term pregnancies at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2019. Probabilities of spontaneous vaginal delivery, operative vaginal delivery, and cesarean delivery were calculated for each hour of pushing and for every 10 maternal pushing contractions. Maternal and neonatal morbidities were assessed in relation to second-stage pushing contractions. Results: Four hundred thirty-nine nulliparous and 424 multiparous patients who entered the second stage of labor were included. Nulliparous patients had significantly more pushing contractions than multiparous patients (20.3±1.8 vs 7.8±1.0 pushes, P<.001). In nulliparous patients, 91.8% (326/355 patients) of spontaneous vaginal deliveries and 50.0% (12/24 patients) of cesarean deliveries occurred by 40 pushing contractions. In multiparous patients, 94.3% (369/391) of spontaneous vaginal deliveries and 50.0% of cesarean deliveries (4/8) occurred by 20 pushing contractions. The probabilities of cesarean delivery were at their highest after 80 pushing contractions in nulliparous patients and after 50 pushing contractions in multiparous patients. In both nulliparous and multiparous patients, there was no significant change in maternal and neonatal composite morbidities as the number of pushing contractions increased. Conclusion: Results from this study suggest that pushing contractions may be a viable alternative method for prediction of the likelihood of spontaneous vaginal delivery and probabilities of operative vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery for patients reaching the second stage of labor. Providing patients with a goal for expected number of pushing contractions may be of motivational benefit.
Preprint
Full-text available
Commercial mobile applications implement several theory-driven features, such as feedback, self-monitoring and goal-setting, but they often fail to drive long-lasting changes in health behavior. The nature of users' goals and how current systems support them might be one reason for that. This study uses the lens of the exerciser self-schema, a physical activity-specific identity variable, to study how commercial self-monitoring systems support process-and outcome-focused goals. A survey of mobile app users monitoring physical activity resulted in 238 valid responses. 59% of the respondents were identified as exerciser schematics. Exercisers differed significantly from those without exercise self-schema (unschematics) in all measured constructs except for outcome-focused goals. Exercisers evaluated their systems as more persuasive and seemed to be more focused on process goals. Process goals contributed positively to outcome goals in all studied subgroups. Exercisers preferred process goals, but the feedback and self-monitoring features of systems do not support this goal focus. Process goals can be considered a means through which to reach outcome goals. Process goals also mediated the well-documented effects of goal specificity. Improving the ability to set and monitor specific process goals seems promising to improve these systems.
Chapter
Full-text available
The performance of an activity can have positive incentives per se and individuals may engage in an activity purely for the enjoyment of it. The engagement due to the enjoyment of an activity is often called intrinsic motivation. Beside this understanding of intrinsic mo-tivation other conceptions are presented (self-determination, experience of competence, interest and involvement, mean-end-correspondence, learning-goal orientation). In doing so, the problem became evident, that the term intrinsic motivation refers to different, even conflicting conceptions. With the “Extended Cognitive Model of Motivation” different as-pects of motivation are theoretically integrated. Instead of using the term intrinsic motiva-tion, we use the term activity-related motivation. Qualitative and quantitative ways to measure activity-related incentives are outlined. Finally we present an intensively studied activity-related incentive, i.e. the experience of flow.
Article
Full-text available
Intrinsic rewards are typically thought to stem from an activity's inherent properties and not from separable rewards one receives from it. Yet, people may not consciously notice or remember all the subtle external rewards that correspond with an activity and may misattribute some directly to the activity itself. We propose that perceptions of intrinsic reward can often be byproducts of misattributed causal inference, and present some initial evidence that perceptions of intrinsic reward can in fact increase when words pertaining to an activity are subtly paired with pleasant context cues. Importantly, these effects follow classic boundary conditions of both misattribution and intrinsic motivation, insofar as they were extinguished when participants could make a proper source attribution and/or when the activity became associated with a blatant external reward. We further propose a distinction can be made between authentically “intrinsic” rewards and the illusion of intrinsic rewards caused by misattribut...
Article
Full-text available
Pursuing personal goals for delayed rewards (e.g., exercising to improve health) often provides consumers with immediate rewards (e.g., a fun workout) in addition to the delayed rewards they receive. With regard to health and academic goals, we find that attending to the immediate rewards of health and academic activities increases persistence in these activities to a greater extent than attending to delayed rewards, even though these activities are selected for the delayed rewards they provide. Specifically, bringing immediate rewards into activity choice—for example, having participants choose the most enjoyable rather than the most useful exercise or the tastier rather than healthier bag of carrots—increases persistence and consumption. Similarly, adding external immediate rewards to activity pursuit—for example, playing music in a high school classroom—increases persistence. Across these studies, immediate rewards are stronger predictors of activity persistence than delayed rewards. This research suggests that marketers and consumers can harness immediate rewards to increase persistence in long-term goals.
Article
Full-text available
We document a shift in the value assigned to intrinsic incentives: people value these incentives more inside an activity than outside the activity (i.e., during vs. before or after pursuit). For example, people care more about the level of interest of their present work task than of past or future work tasks. We document this shift across a variety of activities (exercising, visiting a museum, and lab tasks) and using various measures, including rated importance of intrinsic incentives inside and outside pursuit, actual and planned persistence on activities that offer these incentives, and regret when choosers outside pursuit forgo intrinsic incentives that pursuers later seek. This shift in valuation occurs because intrinsic incentives improve the experience during action pursuit, and therefore, this shift is unique to intrinsic incentives. Extrinsic incentives, by contrast, are valued similarly inside and outside pursuit. (PsycINFO Database Record
Article
The term intrinsic motivation refers to an activity being seen as its own end. Accordingly, we conceptualize intrinsic motivation (IM) as (perceived) means-ends fusion and define an intrinsicality continuum reflecting the degree to which such fusion is experienced. Our Means-Ends Fusion (MEF) theory assumes four major antecedents of activity-goal fusion: (1) Repeated pairing of the activity and the goal, (2) Uniqueness of the activity-goal connection, (3) Perceived similarity between the activity and its goal, and (4) temporal immediacy of goal attainment following the activity. MEF theory further identifies two major consequences of the activity-goal fusion (i.e., manifestations of intrinsic motivation): (1) Perceived instrumentality of the activity to goal attainment and consequent activity engagement; (2) goal-related affective experience of the activity. Empirical evidence for MEF theory comes from diverse fields of psychological inquiry, including animal learning, brain research, and social cognition.
Chapter
There is a long history of thought and research in the social sciences that views human beings as engaged in entirely instrumental activities in pursuit of goals that typically give them pleasure, and presumably, happiness. This view can be contrasted with Aristotle’s “eudaimonic” view that real happiness comes from the pursuit and achievement of excellence, with excellence understood as achieving a telos specific to and appropriate to each activity. In this chapter, we argue for Aristotle’s view in distinguishing instrumental from internal motives. The pursuit of consequences that bear an intimate relation to the activities themselves (internal motives), while often not pleasurable, yields lasting effects on well-being that instrumental consequences typically do not. We discuss both laboratory research and field studies, including a longitudinal study of West Point cadets, in support of our arguments. We suggest that the often-made distinction between “intrinsic” and “extrinsic” motivation fails to capture adequately the complexity of the relations between the things people do and their reasons for doing them.
Article
The authors find that experimental studies using online samples (e.g., MTurk) often violate the assumption of random assignment, because participant attrition-quitting a study before completing it and getting paid-is not only prevalent, but also varies systemically across experimental conditions. Using standard social psychology paradigms (e.g., ego-depletion, construal level), they observed attrition rates ranging from 30% to 50% (Study 1). The authors show that failing to attend to attrition rates in online panels has grave consequences. By introducing experimental confounds, unattended attrition misled them to draw mind-boggling yet false conclusions: that recalling a few happy events is considerably more effortful than recalling many happy events, and that imagining applying eyeliner leads to weight loss (Study 2). In addition, attrition rate misled them to draw a logical yet false conclusion: that explaining one's view on gun rights decreases progun sentiment (Study 3). The authors offer a partial remedy (Study 4) and call for minimizing and reporting experimental attrition in studies conducted on the Web. (PsycINFO Database Record
Article
Self-regulation has been conceptualized as the interplay between controlled and impulsive processes; however, most research has focused on the controlled side (i.e., effortful self-control). The present studies focus on the effects of motivation on impulsive processes, including automatic preferences for goal-disruptive stimuli and subjective reports of temptations and obstacles, contrasting them with effects on controlled processes. This is done by examining people's implicit affective reactions in the face of goal-disruptive "temptations" (Studies 1 and 2), subjective reports of obstacles (Studies 2 and 3) and expended effort (Study 3), as well as experiences of desires and self-control in real-time using experience sampling (Study 4). Across these multiple methods, results show that want-to motivation results in decreased impulsive attraction to goal-disruptive temptations and is related to encountering fewer obstacles in the process of goal pursuit. This, in turn, explains why want-to goals are more likely to be attained. Have-to motivation, on the other hand, was unrelated to people's automatic reactions to temptation cues but related to greater subjective perceptions of obstacles and tempting desires. The discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for self-regulation and motivation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
Article
Prior research in a multifinality context has demonstrated a dilution effect whereby the number of goals connected to a means is inversely connected to the perceived instrumentality of each means (Zhang, Fishbach, & Kruglanski, 2007). In the present research, six studies tested whether the dilution effect would also occur in an equifinality context where more than one means serves a single goal. The results corroborated this hypothesis. Presenting additional means (Study 1) and having participants self-generate multiple means (Study 2) led, as expected, to a reduction in perceived effectiveness of the means. The effect was stronger when the means within the set were seen as distinct rather than similar (Study 3). Increasing the strength of association between one means and the goal led to a reduction in the associative strength of the other means within the set and to a decrease of its perceived effectiveness (Study 4). The dilution effect was found to influence means selection and the magnitude of means engagement (Study 5). Lastly, presenting additional means to attain a goal reduced the perceived effectiveness of the means, which in turn reduced participants’ intrinsic motivation to pursue it (Study 6). Overall, the present work demonstrates that the presence of alternative means to a goal reduces the quality and intensity of engagement in a given means. Broad implications of these findings are discussed.