The impact of imposed patterning, intrinsic motivation, and cognition on random and simple outcomes in choice behavior.

Abstract

This study examined the impact of intrinsic motivation, cognition of the rules underlying choices and their outcomes, and imposed patterning of choice-outcome sets on decision making. Ninety-eight undergraduates were placed in one of three experimental groups and chose between two alternatives that differed in local and overall rates, and under random and simple choice conditions. As expected, accurate perception of the underlying non-verbalized rules was associated with more optimal decision making. Furthermore, imposed patterning and intrinsic motivation (a moderator) were significant factors in determining optimal decision making. These findings support the call for behavioral decision making researchers to consider the role of cognition (rule generation), and personality factors (e.g., intrinsic motivation) in understanding and providing intervention for social behavior changes that may be contingency-governed. Key Words: Intrinsic motivation; Choice; Cognition; Contingency-governed behavior; Rule-governed behavior; Imposed patterning. ********** Choice behavior involves multiple factors. In making decisions, we may consider the outcome of our choices, and determine whether or not we have made the right decisions. The question of whether a decision is right or wrong is not easily answered. This is because it depends on an individual's motivation (Larrick, 1993), his understanding or cognition of the contingencies underlying the decision and its outcome (such as rules and context; Dixon, Hayes & Aban, 2000; Mayhorn, Fisk, & Whittle, 2002), his ability to handle risk or uncertainty (Zaleskiewicz, 2001), the context or situational factors (Kahneman & Tversky, 1984; see Kuhberger, 1998 for meta-analysis) as well as delay to the outcome (Myerson, Green, Hanson, Holt & Estle, 2003). For the purposes of this paper, only factors of motivation, contingencies as related to choice-outcome relationships and context and framing, and, delay to reward are discussed. Motivation encompasses direction, persistence and energy required in active and intentional behavior and has three main categories--amotivation, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Amotivation is the absence of motivation to engage in an activity. Intrinsic motivation is a measure of the pleasure and sense of accomplishment, novelty and challenges associated with engaging in an activity, while extrinsic motivation generally reflects the need for external rewards associated with an activity. Thus a college student may not have any motivation to be in school (amotivation), may be in school to satisfy his parents, to get a better job, or to be seen as a better individual (extrinsic motivation), or, may be in school because he enjoys learning new material or aspires to excellence (intrinsic motivation). An interesting question to consider is how intrinsic motivation interacts with extrinsic motivation to determine a decision. That is, given a constant and a high value of an extrinsic reward (providing high extrinsic motivation), to what extent would an individual's intrinsic motivation determine his choice? As well, how would that decision differ as a function of the nature of the task? Additionally, how would his experience of the rules governing the relationship between the decision and its outcome impact his decision? In one of the early studies on the impact of motivation and reward contingency in decision making, Turnage & Muchinsky (1976) showed that either highly intrinsic or extrinsic rewards may be equally motivating in determining decisions made by college students for monetary rewards. They found however, that these effects were not additive, but rather interactive. The tasks used in their study were either intrinsically or extrinsically motivating, participants either had a choice of their preferred reward or not, and were promised additional reward for successful completion of the tasks. …