Title of Presentation Subtitle  

Expectancy theory emphasizes the idea that a motivational state is a conscious choice based on an assessment of the ‘payoffs’ of exerting effort towards a task. That is, before expending any effort to achieve some outcome, people ask themselves “what is in this for me?” If they cannot see the association between their effort and the attainment of desired outcomes, they will not be motivated to exert effort. Valence is the desirability or undesirability of some outcome e.g. getting a High distinction in this course. Valence of an outcome can be scored using a +10 /-10 scale for positive or negatively framed outcomes. For example, if getting a High distinction was something you really valued you might score it at 8. Instrumentality is the perceived association between different outcomes e.g. getting a high distinction in the course and getting into a PhD program. Instrumentality can be scored as a correlation coefficient, that is, two outcomes can be negatively or positively correlated – a perfect correlation = +1 or –1. For example, the correlation between getting high grades in the course and the entry criteria for a PhD (a distinction average) is pretty strong. The correlation might be estimated at 0.8 (as other factors are also taken into account, but not as much as academic performance). Expectancy is the perceived likelihood that the effort expended will result in some desired level of performance e.g. attending class and studying hard will result in superior grades. Here this relationship is expressed as a probability where 1 would be absolute certainty and 0 would be no chance of occurring. You might estimate the probability of attendance being related to your overall grade at 0.4 as factors other than in class learning would play a role in your final grades (e.g. your ability, biases in perception that may come into play on behalf of your assessor, the quality of the research you were able to find for your assignment). The instrumentality for each outcome is multiplied by its valence - all of these products are added to give a total valence score. Next, the expectancy is then multiplied by the total valence score to get F (motivational force). You can see how motivational force would increase or decrease if any of these components were to change. For example, if you attended all classes up until the first assignment, but did not score well on it, the expectancy that attendance would be related to your performance would decrease and your motivation to attend may drop.

Expectancy theory emphasizes the idea that a motivational state is a conscious choice based on an assessment of the ‘payoffs’ of exerting effort towards a task. That is, before expending any effort to achieve some outcome, people ask themselves “what is in this for me?” If they cannot see the association between their effort and the attainment of desired outcomes, they will not be motivated to exert effort. Valence is the desirability or undesirability of some outcome e.g. getting a High distinction in this course. Valence of an outcome can be scored using a +10 /-10 scale for positive or negatively framed outcomes. For example, if getting a High distinction was something you really valued you might score it at 8. Instrumentality is the perceived association between different outcomes e.g. getting a high distinction in the course and getting into a PhD program. Instrumentality can be scored as a correlation coefficient, that is, two outcomes can be negatively or positively correlated – a perfect correlation = +1 or –1. For example, the correlation between getting high grades in the course and the entry criteria for a PhD (a distinction average) is pretty strong. The correlation might be estimated at 0.8 (as other factors are also taken into account, but not as much as academic performance). Expectancy is the perceived likelihood that the effort expended will result in some desired level of performance e.g. attending class and studying hard will result in superior grades. Here this relationship is expressed as a probability where 1 would be absolute certainty and 0 would be no chance of occurring. You might estimate the probability of attendance being related to your overall grade at 0.4 as factors other than in class learning would play a role in your final grades (e.g. your ability, biases in perception that may come into play on behalf of your assessor, the quality of the research you were able to find for your assignment). The instrumentality for each outcome is multiplied by its valence - all of these products are added to give a total valence score. Next, the expectancy is then multiplied by the total valence score to get F (motivational force). You can see how motivational force would increase or decrease if any of these components were to change. For example, if you attended all classes up until the first assignment, but did not score well on it, the expectancy that attendance would be related to your performance would decrease and your motivation to attend may drop.

Copyright notice Copyright © 2009 University of Tasmania, School of Economics and Finance All rights reserved. Commonwealth of Australia Copyright Regulations 1969 - WARNING This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of the University of Tasmania pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (the Act). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Do not remove this notice. Expectancy theory emphasizes the idea that a motivational state is a conscious choice based on an assessment of the ‘payoffs’ of exerting effort towards a task. That is, before expending any effort to achieve some outcome, people ask themselves “what is in this for me?” If they cannot see the association between their effort and the attainment of desired outcomes, they will not be motivated to exert effort. Valence is the desirability or undesirability of some outcome e.g. getting a High distinction in this course. Valence of an outcome can be scored using a +10 /-10 scale for positive or negatively framed outcomes. For example, if getting a High distinction was something you really valued you might score it at 8. Instrumentality is the perceived association between different outcomes e.g. getting a high distinction in the course and getting into a PhD program. Instrumentality can be scored as a correlation coefficient, that is, two outcomes can be negatively or positively correlated – a perfect correlation = +1 or –1. For example, the correlation between getting high grades in the course and the entry criteria for a PhD (a distinction average) is pretty strong. The correlation might be estimated at 0.8 (as other factors are also taken into account, but not as much as academic performance). Expectancy is the perceived likelihood that the effort expended will result in some desired level of performance e.g. attending class and studying hard will result in superior grades. Here this relationship is expressed as a probability where 1 would be absolute certainty and 0 would be no chance of occurring. You might estimate the probability of attendance being related to your overall grade at 0.4 as factors other than in class learning would play a role in your final grades (e.g. your ability, biases in perception that may come into play on behalf of your assessor, the quality of the research you were able to find for your assignment). The instrumentality for each outcome is multiplied by its valence - all of these products are added to give a total valence score. Next, the expectancy is then multiplied by the total valence score to get F (motivational force). You can see how motivational force would increase or decrease if any of these components were to change. For example, if you attended all classes up until the first assignment, but did not score well on it, the expectancy that attendance would be related to your performance would decrease and your motivation to attend may drop.