Deci, Edward L. Handbook of Self-determination Research. Rochester: The University of Rochester Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 85— Teaching and Researching Motivation 2nd ed. Harlow: Longman, Motivation, language attitudes and globalization: A Hungarian perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Hutchison, Tom, and Alan Waters.
English for specific purposes: A learning — centred approach. Niemiec, Christopher P. Noels, Kimberly A. Nunan, David. Benson, and P. Oxford, R. Palfreyman, and R. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, Reeve, Johnmarshall. Christensen, A. Reschly, and C. New York: Springer, Robinson, Pauline. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall International, Ryan, Richard M. Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York: Guilford Press, Sinclair, Barbara.
It almost goes without saying that good language learners are motivated. Common sense and everyday experience suggest that the high achievers of this world have motivation, a word which derives from … Expand. Motivation and Motivating in the Foreign Language Classroom. Much of this research has been initiated and inspired by two Canadian psychologists, Robert Gardner and … Expand. The theoretical framework of learner autonomy in our field, and probably in others, is far from coherent.
Although L2 learner autonomy has benefited from many expert contributions e. Holec, , … Expand. Highly Influential. View 6 excerpts, references background. Abstract This article is concerned with learner autonomy in formal language learning contexts schools, colleges and universities.
It begins with some general reflections on the nature of learner … Expand. The two causality orientations most relevant to the current study are autonomy and controlled orientations.
Individuals with autonomy orientation try to follow their hearts and perform self-determined behaviors. They are more likely to deem external elements such as rewards and instructions as instructive and supportive. Furthermore, empirical evidence indicated that control-oriented individuals are more likely to suffer the destructive effect that external rewards have on their intrinsic motivation Hagger and Chatzisarantis, Following these pioneering literatures, in this study we propose that, after suffering autonomy frustration control-oriented participants would experience the destructive spillover effect of autonomy frustration to a greater extent and have an even lower autonomous motivation measured by the amplitude of RewP difference wave in a subsequent autonomy-supportive activity compared with autonomy-oriented participants.
The study was approved by the local institutional review board. All participants were right-handed and had either normal or corrected-to-normal vision, none of which stated a history of neurological disorders or mental diseases. All participants were required to give written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. They were randomly allocated to the experimental group and the control group.
Two participants with excessive recording artifacts were excluded, leaving 44 participants 22 males; a total of 21 participants in the control group for the final analysis. During the participant recruiting stage, we emphasized that two experimenters organizing two irrelevant experiments decide to recruit participants together as durations of both experiments are rather short.
The two experiments were conducted in different rooms and were organized by different experimenters, reinforcing the idea that they were irrelevant. Then, the first experimenter guided the participant into a room prepared for behavioral experiments to work on the first task, which was a computerized Tangram puzzle.
Participants in both groups were instructed to construct preset patterns using the geometrical forms provided to them see Figure 1B. The operation methods and rules were carefully introduced. Figure 1. Demonstration of the experimental paradigm. While the experimental tasks as well as their sequence were exactly the same for participants in both groups, they were provided varied instructions.
Experimental group participants were informed to comply with the audio directives throughout the game. The instructions were well prepared to construct a controlling context. In previous studies, this approach has been widely applied to induce autonomy frustration Reeve et al. Specifically, the instructions comprised of frequent deadlines to accomplish the figures e.
Go straightly to figure 9. In addition, participants were informed that the experimenter would monitor them through the one-way mirror installed in the back wall, and that they should strictly follow the audio instructions during the game. On the contrary, participants in the control group were informed that the experimenter would play instructions by audio to help them play the game.
However, these instructions did not contain any imperative component. After the first experiment terminated, the same experimenter came back and thanked the participant.
Following that, participants were invited to accomplish a post-experiment questionnaire about their perceived autonomy frustration in the first task. Then, the experimenter guided them to another room for electrophysical experiments, where another experimenter took charge. In the second electrophysiological experiment, all participants were guided to sit in a dimly lit, electrically shielded and sound-attenuated experimental cubicle.
The experimenter introduced the stopwatch task to all participants and instructed them to use a keypad to respond. As illustrated in Figure 1C , the participants were instructed to stop a running watch around 3 s with the right thumb. The whole experiment included 80 trials. No specific instructions were played by audio, so they can play the game at their own pace throughout the experiment. We carefully designed five task icons in advance see Figure 2 , including a heart-shape icon, a leaf-shape icon and so on.
Moreover, similar with a pioneering study examining autonomy support Meng and Ma, , we provided two versions of stopwatch games, the discrepancy of which lies in the pre-defined success time window 2. After each 20 trials, participants have an opportunity to choose the game version they like.
It is worth noting that participants would receive a fixed amount of money irrelevant to their task performances. As the second task was conducted in a non-controlling context, we believe there were not any controlled sources of motivation, which makes it possible for us to compare the autonomous motivation in the stopwatch task between the two groups.
Figure 2. Five stopwatch pictures provided in the stopwatch task. They only vary in their appearance, while difficulties of the task are identical. As depicted in Figure 1C , within each trial, a cross symbol was firstly presented for — ms, then a stopwatch would automatically start. If the response time fell into the specified interval, task performances the exact stop time would be shown in green.
If not, in red. The inter-trial interval lasted for — ms. A series of pilot studies were implemented to determine the time windows i. Before the second experiment formally started, all participants were allowed to have a trial practice to familiarize with the stopwatch task. Stimuli, recorded triggers and behavioral responses were presented by E-Prime 2.
Following the second experiment, participants were firstly instructed to complete a scale on their perceived competence satisfaction in the stopwatch game, and were then debriefed and paid accordingly. The scale includes 12 written vignettes and participants were faced with three alternatives in each vignette, one concerning an autonomy-oriented item, another control-oriented, and a final one impersonally oriented. The channel data went through online band-pass-filter from 0.
We used the left mastoid as online reference. In off-line re-reference, we employed the averaged left and right mastoids. During off-line data analyses, electroencephalogram data went through standard data processing procedures conducted by ASALab 4. In this study we focused on the RewP as well as P, which were consistently demonstrated to be related with feedback processing and outcome evaluation in previous event-related potential studies Proudfit, ; Muhlberger et al.
As amplitude of RewP win-lose difference wave generally reaches its peak at frontocentral electrodes around ms upon feedback onset Ullsperger et al.
Moreover, in line with existing literatures, we calculated the mean voltage of the P within — ms over CZ and CPZ channels Ferrari et al.
These findings indicated that our manipulations were successful. In our study, the mean error is defined as the absolute value of discrepancy between the responding time and the target one 3 s. Mean voltage amplitudes of the RewP see Figure 3 were 3. Figure 3. Grand-averaged event-related potentials waveforms of RewP and its win-lose difference wave are shown for group autonomy-frustration group vs. Figure 4.
Grand-averaged P are shown for both groups autonomy-frustration group vs. However, whether the negative impact of autonomy frustration would spread to another activity is elusive and awaits investigation.
The current study aims to examine whether experienced autonomy frustration would spill over to a subsequent irrelevant task even if it provides the opportunity for autonomy restoration. Social environments encompassing deadlines, surveillance, orders and directives have been shown to be controlling Amabile et al. Thus, we played audio instructions incorporating the controlling elements to induce autonomy frustration during Session 1.
This approach is in accordance with a few pioneering studies Reeve et al. Specifically, when participants in the experimental group were working on the first task, we played controlling audio instructions incorporating frequent deadlines, specified solutions, orders and requests.
Meanwhile, neutral audio instructions which did not contain any imperative components were played for participants in the control group. We found a smaller RewP difference wave and P in the autonomy frustration group than in the control group. Besides, for individuals who experienced autonomy frustration, their control orientation negatively correlated with amplitude of the RewP difference wave.
At first glance, findings of this study seem to be in conflict with a line of studies conducted by Radel et al. As autonomy is a fundamental psychological need, when faced with autonomy frustration, it is unlikely that individuals would just sit there and do nothing. Indeed, according to the theoretical prediction of self-determination theory, when faced with need frustration, individuals may take actions to restore the thwarted need via self-regulation, and the restorative process may even be subconscious Fiske, ; Veltkamp et al.
In a pioneering behavioral experiment that has a similar design with ours, Radel and colleagues found that individuals who experienced autonomy frustration showed stronger intrinsic motivation in a subsequent easy and autonomy-supportive task.
It is worth noting that the second task was a computerized Sokoban puzzle, which is fairly easy Radel et al. Our setting of task difficulty was in accordance with the requirement and guideline of RewP data analysis. Otherwise, the magnitude of RewP between different conditions will no longer be comparable. We consider that differences in the difficulty of the second task may explain differences in the observed results.
In the study conducted by Radel and colleagues, an autonomy frustration-induced compensation effect was observed, as participants showed greater interest in another easy task which could help restore their autonomy.
In fact, Radel et al. Our finding is also consistent with a recent literature indicating that there are prerequisites and boundary conditions for the restoration of competence, another fundamental psychological need Fang et al.
Taken together, these findings indicate that the restorative process of autonomy may not always be activated. Thus, other boundary conditions for such a process deserve further investigation. Findings of this study extend the scope of need frustration and restoration research.
Up to now, research on need frustration predominately focused on its immediate effect, in other words, the influence of need frustration in its original thwarting context. Following a few pioneering studies Radel et al. Consistent with several previous studies Sheldon and Krieger, ; Ryan and Deci, , we further confirmed that the negative effect of autonomy frustration can be far-reaching and may spread to subsequent irrelevant tasks.
In addition, one of our major contributions is the finding that control causality orientation would aggravate the spillover effect of autonomy frustration.
Hence, among participants whose autonomy got thwarted, control-oriented ones suffered more from prior autonomy frustration. It seems that they declined to restore the undermined autonomy in the second autonomy-supportive task and showed less autonomous motivation in the stopwatch game compared with those with a predominate autonomy causality orientation. In addition, our results provide insights to existing literatures on autonomous motivation. Our findings bear important empirical implications as well.
Previous literatures in the educational setting have consistently showed that students would display higher disengagement and more bullying behaviors when their teachers adopt a controlling instructional style Hein et al. In our study, we further found that autonomy frustration as a result of the controlling context would have a spillover effect on the subsequent activity.
0コメント