Мотивацияны ығыстыру теориясы: Психология және микроэкономика тұрғысынан

Theory in psychology and microeconomics
Motivation crowding theory is the theory from psychology and microeconomics suggesting that providing extrinsic incentives for certain kinds of behavior—such as promising monetary rewards for accomplishing some task—can sometimes undermine intrinsic motivation for performing that behavior. The result of lowered motivation, in contrast with the predictions of neoclassical economics, can be an overall decrease in the total performance. The term "crowding out" was coined by Bruno Frey in 1997, but the idea was first introduced into economics much earlier by Richard Titmuss, who argued in 1970 that offering financial incentives for certain behaviors could counter intuitively lead to a drop in performance of those behaviors. While the empirical evidence supporting crowding out for blood donation has been mixed, there has since been a long line of psychological and economic exploration supporting the basic phenomenon of crowding out. The typical study of crowding out asks subjects to complete some task either for payment or no payment. Researchers then look to self reported measures of motivation for completing the task, willingness to complete additional rounds of the task for no additional compensation, or both. Removing the payment incentive, compared to those who were never paid at all, typically lowers overall interest in and willingness to complete the task. This process is known as "crowding out" since whatever motivation for the task that previously existed—as estimated by the control condition that was not offered compensation for the task—has been crowded out by motivation merely based on the payment. A 2020 study which reviewed more than a 100 tests of motivation crowding theory and conducted its own field experiments found that paying individuals for intrinsically enjoyable tasks boosts their performance, but that taking payment away after it is expected may lead individuals to perform worse than if they were not paid at first.

According to research on operant conditioning and behaviorism in the 1950s, extrinsic rewards should increase the chances of the rewarded behavior occurring, with the greatest effect on behavior if the reward is given immediately after the behavior. In these studies, often removing the reward quickly led to a return to the pre reward baseline frequency of the behavior. These findings led to popular calls for the adoption of incentives as motivational tools in a variety of professional and educational contexts. Moreover, according to standard economics, providing extrinsic incentives for a behavior has an immediate relative price effect which should produce more of that behavior by making that behavior more attractive. Literature in economics has myriad examples of this. However, Titmuss argued that sometimes adding incentives can actually diminish the rewarded behavior. In this case, behavior does not require any extrinsic reward.

A wide range of behaviors has been investigated for crowding out, including completion of rote tasks, engagement with interesting puzzles, pro social favors, creative art projects, and more. Crowding out is typically measured in two ways. First, crowding out is measured as self reported interest in the activity after an incentive has been provided. Second, crowding out can be measured by engagement in the activity while subjects believe the experiment has ended and after full compensation has been provided. Some studies use both measures. In some cases, crowding out has been found to directly affect effort and performance on the target behavior itself even while compensated for performance. For instance, paying people a token amount of money to raise money for charity has been shown to cause people to wind up collecting less money than those who were not paid at all.

According to a meta analysis, three kinds of rewards are used in the investigation of crowding out. First, task noncontingent rewards, such as show up fees, are offered to subjects independent of task performance or completion, simply as compensation for their time. These rewards are not expected to displace intrinsic motivation. Second, task contingent rewards, on the other hand, are incentives on the quantity, quality, or completion of some specific behavior (e. g. solving word puzzles or collecting charitable donations). Crowding out is thought to be most significant in this case. Finally, performance contingent rewards, incentives for achieving certain outcomes, are thought to create comparatively little crowding out because they can serve as a signal of status and achievement rather than tampering with motivation. tangible (e. g. gifts), and symbolic rewards college students, and adults doing a wide variety of tasks. In a classic study, Deci paid all subjects for participation in a psychological experiment that involved solving multiple puzzles or IQ test questions. Half of the subjects were paid a flat fee just for showing up to the experiment, but the other half of subjects were informed that they would be paid per their completion of the study's tasks. After the presumptive experiment was over, subjects were left with free time during which they could either sit idly or complete more tasks. Deci measured the number of additional IQ questions or puzzles completed during this non compensated time as well as self reported measurements of interest in the task. Deci found that, compared to those who were paid simply for showing up, subjects who were paid specifically to complete the tasks were significantly less likely to complete additional non compensated tasks and gave lower ratings of interest levels in the tasks themselves. Deci interpreted these findings to suggest that motivation for and interest in the tasks had been displaced by the provision of extrinsic incentives. However, more recent research has found that even if workers find incentives to be insufficient then there can be short run crowding out of the rewarded behavior too. While all of these early investigations demonstrated that providing extrinsic incentives could undermine motivation for the rewarded behavior, researchers had not yet established the psychological process involved that could explain this consistent pattern of results.

Various explanations have been offered for why crowding out occurs.

On this view—sometimes referred to as cognitive evaluation theory—the post behavioral significance people assign to the reward determines subsequent motivation. Deci and Ryan argue that rewards can be seen to have two components: one that controls people's behavior and thus infringes on their autonomy, and a different, status signaling component that enhances people's sense of competence. For instance, an employee recognition award could be seen as either the reason why an employee worked so hard in a given month (i. e. to win the award) or could be seen simply as a recognition of the employee's performance in general. If an extrinsic reward for some behavior appears to be controlling (i. e. the reason a person plausibly performed that behavior), this is argued to supplant intrinsic motivation for engaging in the behavior. Insofar, however, as the extrinsic incentive is seen not as an inducement but rather as a signal of high status or high achievement in general (e. g. a merit based award), the incentive will engender more effort without crowding out motivation. On this account, then, the extent to which a given extrinsic incentive crowds out motivation is determined by the balance of the controlling versus status signaling nature of the awards as perceived by the actor.

Various attempts have been made by behaviorists to explain the apparent phenomenon of crowding out in terms of reward conditioning. Behaviors that are typically thought to be intrinsically motivated, these theories argue, are actually motivated by the social praise they tend to engender. Dickinson argues that part of the reason why these behaviors are socially praised is precisely because they are not connected with any particular reinforcers. When a person helps someone else, he argues, he receives praise in part because there does not seem to be any specific private incentive for doing helping. Thus, the introduction of a specific reinforcer such as an extrinsic reward lowers the public praise, Dickinson argues. If the loss of praise is larger than the size of the specific reinforcer, she argues, then free choice selection of that behavior will decrease. Hence, what appears as crowding out of intrinsic motivation can instead be explained, according to these theories, by shifting perceptions and incentives.

In a context of uncertainty or information asymmetry, rewards can signal important information to the actor. If the person offering the reward (the "principal") is presumed to know something more about the task than the person to engage in the activity (the "agent"), then offering an extrinsic reward can be seen as revealing the principal's distrust as to whether or not the action would be taken without the inducement. In this view, offering a reward is a signal that either the principal knows the task is unpleasant and otherwise would not be completed, or that the principal does not trust that the agent is sufficiently motivated without such incentives. On either interpretation, agents are understood to infer something negative about the activity which lowers their willingness to engage in it without additional incentive. An implication of this view is that, under certain conditions, crowding in might occur. If an activity were valued poorly by an agent, an especially high premium offered might signal to the agent that this task is more valuable than the agent previously considered.

Additionally, the presence or absence of extrinsic incentives can be interpreted by observers as signals of an agent's motivations for engaging in some activity. To the extent that agents are concerned with cultivating an image as an altruist, the presence of extrinsic incentives can lower interest in engaging in some task that might signal non altruistic motives.

People have proposed using the insights of motivational crowding theory to change reward structures at work, in schools, for government policies, non profits, and at home. The basic phenomenon of incentives undermining motivation, effort, and output has been demonstrated in populations of children, college students, adults, and workers, both in the lab and in the field. Crowding out has been shown to occur in teacher performance based pay, temporary workers' effort in commission based pay structures, charitable giving, and student scholastic performance. The collection of this evidence has led some economists to call for rethinking how governments and charitable organizations that rely on volunteers use incentives and pay for performance schemes.