Theories Flashcards
(26 cards)
Social Identity Theory
Tafjel & Turner (1979)
because our definitions of self are shaped by group memberships, we are motivated to enhance our self concept by seeing a positively valued distinctiveness for those groups.
we engage in social comparisons to differentiate between groups (in-groups and out-groups), focusing on similarities between us / our in-group, and differences between us / our out-group
because our self-identities are are influenced by the groups in which we belong, we have a desire to boost our self image and therefore shape our in-groups in a more positive light (positively unique).
token theory
Kanter (1977)
when employees belong to a token group (15% or less of the group), they receive increased attention, higher expectations for them to behave consistently with their stereotypes (Watkins et al., 2019)
Token individuals often feel pressured to comply with their demographic stereotype
self-categorization theory
Turner (1985, 1987)
As social categories become salient, there is a qualitative shift in individuals’ cognitive structures: begin to depersonalize our identities and view ourselves and others more as representatives of social categories (rather than unique persons)
intergroup differentiation becomes more pronounced with the increased convergence of in-group members + divergence from out-group members
sustains individuals’ own self esteem
value in diversity hypothesis
Cox & Blake (1991); Williams & O’Reilly (1998)
information processing perspective on diversity; categorical dissimilarity can allow for differences in knowledge/ experience, ultimately exposing group members to a broader range of viewpoints
with access to a larger and varied pool of informational resources, it is assumed that heterogeneous groups are more likely to problem solve at higher quality compared to homogenous groups
negative individual level outcomes of diversity, intergroup bias
Tsui et al. (1992)
we prefer our in-group members to out-group members because of we think we are have more similar attributes to the in-group than the out-group
Ferguson & Porter (2013, 2015)
this is not novel, replicated many times, including in performance evaluations
intergroup bias (specifically diversity-based) impact out-group members’ self-esteem, well-being, work attitudes, and behavior
VIE theory
Vroom (1964)
Cognitive theory that contends we are most motivated when we believe
(a) our actions are going to lead to high performance (expectancy),
(b) the performance will have a positive outcome (instrumentality),
(c) the outcomes are important and/or desirable (valence)
Combining these factors = motivational force
When deciding between 2 goals to pursue, we compare the motivational forces and choose the better option
theory of planned behavior
Fishbeln & Ajzen (1975); Ajzen (1991)
Similar assumptions as VIE, includes:
(a) perceived behavioral control (similar to E)
(b) attitude toward the behavior (similar to V)
(c) adds a social component (subjective norm)
which predicts behavioral intentions
behavioral control + attitude + social context –> behavioral intentions –> behavior
inclusion climate
Li et al (1998)
identity-conscious programs (meaning they target specific identity groups) generate an inclusion climate
multilevel evidence: employees within an org with an inclusion climate perceive the org as better fulfilling diversity management obligations; they respond with higher levels of affective commitment
Meta-analytic support for VIE theory
Chapman et al (2005), Uggerslev et al. (2012) for job search and job choice
Bauer et al. (2016) for training motivation
Van Eerde & Thierry (1996) VIE is more useful than energy-investment or persistence when explaining performance effort
higher at between-person than within-person
Meta-analytic evidence of TPB
Ajzen (1991)
TPB can explain up to 20% of the variance in people’s behavior
perceived behavioral control is important; relates to behavior directly and indirectly (via behavioral intent)
Armitage & Conner (2001)
subjective norm (social component) plays least important role
goal setting theory
Locke & Latham (1990)
conscious goals and intentions drive performance by affecting the direction of
(a) behavior
(b) energy
(c) persistence
via
(a) goal level - hard is better
(b) specificity - specific is better
(c) commitment or acceptance - higher is better
when a goal is assigned, we tend to be more committed when the goal is supported by peers, made public, or have a reward
goals are more effective in influencing performance when tasks are not too complex, when employees have the ability, and there are few situational impediments (this can be strengthened with goal setting tactics like SMART goals; or implementation intentions - Gollwitzer, 1999)
control theory
Carver & Scheier (1982)
People regulae their behavior by monitoring discrepancies between the actual and desired states (behavior and goals)
motivation = desire to reduce the discrepancy via exerting more effort and allocating more resources to the task
social cognitive theory (as it pertains to self-efficacy)
Bandura (1986, 2012)
Introduces self-efficacy (SE): our true beliefs about our capabilities to mobilize motivation, cognitive resources, and actions needed to perform a task and succeed at a given level
SE influences behavior directly and indirectly (increase in outcome expectancy, goal commitment, goal level, perceived ability to cope with contextual factors that influence achieving that goal)
SE is shaped by task requirements, previous experience, assessment of personal (e.g., resilience) and environmental (e.g., social persuasion) resources
control theory + social cognitive theory
Vancouver (2005, 2018)
SCT adopts a system level approach and is more concerns with the regulation of higher level goals
Control theory focuses on lower level goals (sub-system level approach)
SCT and CT both acknowledge motivation comes from desire to resolve discrepancies
SCT says we create discrepancies for ourselves by creating more challenging goals. CT assumes a goal hierarchy where higher-level long term goals are responsible for establishing lower level goals, which creates discrepancies
SCT and CT are compatible such that CT provides a description of mechanisms underlying the observed processes
Self-efficacy’s role: SE can play multiple roles in motivation/ performance, some that negatively affect effort and performance and some that positively affect them. Yet, these roles are all useful for facilitating self-regulation.
goal implementation theory
Gollwitzer (1999)
focuses on cognitive processes of self-regulation; phases of goal achievement
(a) establishment phase - adopt broad mindset that they want to pursue something; assessing expectancy and value of various goals
(b) planning phase - narrow down mindset, and turn attention directly to the goal and action-relevant info
(c) striving phase - immersion in the activity, closed and action-focused mindset
(d) evaluation phase - thinking becomes broad again; evaluate efforts against the feasibility and desirability of the goal
implementation intentions work better than goal intentions (describes the HOW rather than the WHAT)
resource allocation theory
Kanfer & Ackerman (1989)
focus on HOW resources are allocated during the goal striving phase
ability matters when motivation is high, particularly when people are learning new tasks
propose we have limited resources and must carefully divide our effort and attention, especially for complex tasks
resources can be invested in
(a) on-tasks
(b) off-tasks
(c) self-regulatory processes
well-learned / automated tasks require low task investment
difficult / novel tasks require high investment in task, which makes it difficult to engage in self-regulation
self-determination theory
Deci & Ryan (2000)
Macro-theory of motivation
People are
(a) active, and
(b) growth oriented
in nature, and interact with their environment to fulfill their potential
emphasizes the importance of motivation through mini theories (cognitive evaluation theory, organismic integration theory)
stresses the importance of INTRINSIC motivation over extrinsic motivation
SDT: cognitive evaluation theory
Deci (1975), Deci et al. (1999)
focuses on intrinsic motivation and how external events impacts it
Extrinsic motivation (ie rewards) may decrease the intrinsic interest in particular activities = crowding out effect. supported in some studies and not others
applies primarily to activities that people find interesting, optimally challenging, or aesthetically pleasing
Cerasoli et al. (2014)
synergistic effect of joint intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
found that incentives
coexist with intrinsic motivation, depending on the type of performance and the contingency of the incentive
SDT: organismic integration theory
Deci & Ryan (1985) book
extends the concepts of CET by examining extrinsic motivation, different forms of motivation can become more self-determined through internalization
i.e., the detrimental effect of extrinsic motivation may depend on the type
i.e., extrinsic motivation can become more self-determined through a process of internalization and integration into one’s own values and sense of self
[this is also where the motivation continuum comes in, that shows amotivation–extrinsic motivation–intrinsic motivation and all the types]
goal setting theory and VIE theory (valence and expectancy)
when we see our goals as important (valence), we feel more efficacious (expectancy) to achieve that goal
Locke & Latham (1990)
also, when a goal is assigned, we tend to be more committed when the goal is supported by peers, made public, or have a reward
SDT: Basic needs theory
Ryan & Deci (2002)
3 needs
(a) autonomy
(b) belongingness
(c) competence
explains the (positive/ negative) implications of (autonomous/ controlled) motivation and (intrinsic/ extrinsic) values
autonomous+intrinsic are positively related to basic need fulfillment
controlled+extrinsic are negatively related to basic need fulfillment**
come back to this about incentives and informative/controlling effect
Meta analytic evidence for basic need fulfillment
Van den Broeck et al. (2016)
Need fulfillment relates to
(a) attitudes (affective commitment, low TI)
(b) behaviors (performance, creativity, OCB)
(c) employee well-being (affect, engagement, burnout)
*will be good paper for evidence
AET and emotions
Weiss & Cropanzano (1996) original; Ashkanasy & Dorris (2017) annual review
Moods and emotions are unique affective states that serve wither as responses to affective
(a) events,
(b) situations, or
(c) objects
that may be perceived as a threat against–or opportunity for–achieving personal goals
behavior and performance at work is largely due to how they feel in reaction to our environment at any given moment
important to recognize emotion at work in terms of impact of:
the objects/events–> employee emotion–> worker attitudes and behaviors
