Perceived Control (Motivation)

Notwithstanding the disparate nature of cognitive conceptions of motivation, they are united in their assertion that perceived control over task engagement and subsequent outcomes constitutes a critical influence upon an individual's motivation (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2006). Perceived control likewise forms the very nucleus of the belief system inherent within learned helplessness, which serves as a psychological perspective on behaviour particularly pertinent to academic motivation. As we shall observe later in this chapter, perceptions of control are important determinants of intrinsic motivation.

It may be posited that individuals harbour disparate convictions concerning the extent of their mastery over diverse situations and circumstances. It is pertinent to recall Bandura's (1986) distinction between self-efficacy and outcome expectancies; the former alludes to the perceived faculties for acquiring or executing behaviours, whilst the latter pertains to beliefs concerning the sequelae of actions. Perceived control assumes a central position in both aforementioned expectancies. Individuals who believe they possess the capacity to govern their learning and performance, as well as the ramifications of their actions, evince a sense of agency. They are more predisposed to initiate and sustain behaviours directed towards these ends than are individuals who harbour a diminished sense of control over their capabilities and the outcomes of their actions.

Skinner, Wellborn, and Connell (1990) delineated three categories of beliefs that contribute to perceived control. Strategy beliefs constitute expectancies concerning factors that impinge upon success (e.g., ability, exertion, other persons, fortune, unknown factors). Capacity beliefs pertain to personal capabilities concerning ability, exertion, others, and fortune. By way of illustration, a strategy belief might be, “The most efficacious means by which I may attain favourable marks is through diligent application”; a capacity belief might be articulated as, “I find myself unable to apply myself assiduously to my scholastic pursuits.” Control beliefs are expectancies concerning one’s prospects of faring well in academia without reference to specific means (e.g., “I am capable of excelling in my studies should I so desire”).

Analogous to Bandura’s social cognitive theory, wherein self-efficacy and outcome expectancies contribute to an individual’s sense of agency, Skinner et al. propounded a tripartite system of perceived control. Their research demonstrated that these beliefs exert influence upon academic performance by either fostering or diminishing active engagement in learning, and that instructors contributed to students’ perceptions of control by furnishing contingency (lucid and consistent guidelines and feedback) and involvement (interest in and dedication of resources to students).

Evidence further suggests that when individuals believe they exert control over their environment, they exhibit greater tolerance towards aversive stimuli and attain a superior level of performance. Glass and Singer (1972) tasked adults with assignments and subjected them periodically to a cacophonous and irritating noise. Participants in the no-control condition were unable to govern the sound. Researchers apprised participants in the perceived direct-control condition that they possessed the means to terminate the noise by depressing a button, yet counselled them against doing so unless absolutely necessary. Researchers informed participants in the perceived indirect-control condition that depressing a button would transmit a signal to an accomplice who possessed the capacity to terminate the noise; the experimenter likewise counselled these participants against depressing the button unless absolutely necessary. Perceived control (whether direct or indirect) engendered significantly greater persistence and fewer errors compared to the absence of perceived control. Individuals with perceived control judged the noise to be less aversive than did participants lacking control. These findings intimate that students harbouring a sense of agency or control are better equipped to recover from setbacks and ultimately achieve their objectives.

Learned helplessness constitutes a psychological phenomenon of considerable import, serving to accentuate perceptions of control. It doth denote a psychological state entailing a disturbance in motivation, cognitive processes, and emotions, arising from previously experienced uncontrollability (Maier & Seligman, 1976; Peterson, 2000; Seligman, 1975, 1991). The salient determinant in the genesis of learned helplessness lies in a perceived independence between responses and outcomes.

Helplessness was identified through meticulous laboratory investigations wherein canines, subjected to inescapable shocks, were subsequently relocated to a different setting wherein they possessed the capacity to evade said shocks by surmounting a hurdle. The prior inescapable shocks conditioned the canines; consequently, they exhibited scant inclination to effect an escape in the new environment, opting instead to passively endure the shock. Canines not previously exposed to inescapable shock readily acquired the means of escape.

One manifestation of helplessness resides in passivity. Individuals may remain inert when they harbour the conviction that they wield no control over a given situation. Helplessness also retards the process of learning. Individuals, both human and animal, exposed to uncontrollable circumstances may either fail to acquire adaptive responses or acquire them at a pace slower than those not subjected to uncontrollability. Helplessness engenders emotional manifestations. Prior uncontrollable situations may initially incite a more aggressive response, but eventually, behaviour becomes less assertive.

Learned helplessness hath found application across diverse clinical contexts (Fincham & Cain, 1986). Seligman (1975) posited helplessness as an explanation for reactive depression engendered by sudden, dramatic vicissitudes in one's life (e.g., demise of a cherished individual, dissolution of marriage, or loss of employment). This explanation holds intuitive plausibility, inasmuch as individuals typically experience a sense of helplessness in such predicaments. Concomitantly, numerous individuals afflicted with depression attribute blame to themselves for the untoward events in their lives. Alex, for instance, might believe that his dismissal from employment stemmed from his habitual tardiness and that he could have averted said dismissal had he arrived but a few minutes earlier each day. The attribution of personal responsibility for adverse occurrences stands in contradiction to the notion that helplessness arises from a perceived absence of control.

Seligman's original model of learned helplessness underwent reformulation to incorporate attributions (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978). The reformulated model posits that explanations (attributions) for outcomes exert influence over future expectancies of outcomes and reactions thereto. Explanations vary along three dimensions: stable–unstable, global–specific, and internal–external. An individual who attributes negative outcomes to stable causes (e.g., 'I am invariably late for everything') is more prone to anticipate unfavourable events in the future and may succumb to helplessness more readily than one who attributes such outcomes to unstable causes (e.g., 'I arrived late owing to inclement weather'). Causes may impinge upon numerous facets of one's life (global) or but a single facet (specific). Students may harbour the belief that they lack aptitude in all academic subjects or merely in one. Global attributions are more likely to engender helplessness. Causes for negative events may reside internally within the individual (e.g., deficient intelligence) or externally (e.g., the instructor administers inequitable examinations). Internal attributions are disposed to culminate in helplessness. Collectively, individuals most susceptible to helplessness are those who habitually explain negative events with internal, global, and stable attributions (e.g., 'I perform poorly in school because I am not particularly intelligent').

Learned helplessness doth characterise sundry scholars enduring learning impediments, who find themselves ensnared within a pernicious cycle wherein negative convictions reciprocally interact with academic setbacks (Licht & Kistner, 1986). For diverse reasons, scholars falter in their scholastic endeavours, and thereby commence to harbour doubts concerning their learning prowess, viewing academic successes as matters beyond their control. Such convictions engender vexation and a proneness to abandon tasks with undue haste. A lack of assiduousness and persistence doth contribute to further failings, which, in turn, serve to reinforce negative convictions. Eventually, scholars interpret their successes as externally induced; for example, the task at hand was facile, they were fortunate, or the pedagogue lent them assistance. They attribute failures to a deficiency in innate ability, which is internal, comprehensive, and immutable, and which doth adversely affect self-efficacy, motivation, and scholarly achievement (Nolen-Hoeksema, Girgus, & Seligman, 1986). In the opening scene, Margaret may be considered a candidate for learned helplessness.

Compared with scholars of ordinary ability, scholars enduring learning impediments harbour lower expectations for success, judge themselves inferior in capacity, and emphasise a deficiency in ability as the root cause of failure (Boersma & Chapman, 1981; Butkowsky & Willows, 1980; Chapman, 1988; Harris et al., 2006; Palmer, Drummond, Tollison, & Zinkgraff, 1982). Such scholars oft do not attribute failure to a lack of exertion (Andrews & Debus, 1978; Dweck, 1975; Pearl, Bryan, & Donohue, 1980). They surrender readily when confronted with difficulties, cite uncontrollable causes for successes and failures, and possess a diminished perception of internal control over outcomes (Johnson, 1981; Licht & Kistner, 1986). Scholars may even generalise these negative convictions to situations wherein they previously have not experienced failure.

Dweck integrated learned helplessness into a model of achievement motivation (Dweck, 1986, 1999; Dweck & Leggett, 1988). Ego involvement doth characterise helpless scholars. Their scholastic aspirations centre upon the completion of tasks and the avoidance of negative judgements concerning their competence. They may subscribe to a fixed mindset and believe that intelligence is a stable quantity (Dweck, 2006). They shun challenges, exhibit a paucity of persistence in the face of difficulty, harbour low perceptions of their capabilities, and may experience anxiety whilst engaged in tasks (Diener & Dweck, 1978, 1980). In contrast, mastery-oriented scholars are more inclined to adopt a growth mindset and exhibit a task-involved achievement pattern. They believe that intelligence is capable of augmentation, and their scholastic aspirations are to learn and attain greater competence. They possess elevated perceptions of their learning capabilities, frequently seek out challenges, and persevere at difficult tasks.

Mastery-oriented and helpless scholars oft do not differ in intellectual ability. Albeit helpless scholars may possess cognitive skill deficits, these alone do not precipitate failure. Not all scholars enduring learning impediments enter this cycle; some continue to feel confident and exhibit positive attributional patterns. One factor that may be of import is the frequency of failure: Scholars who fail in numerous school subjects are especially susceptible. Reading deficits are particularly influential; poor reading skills affect learning in many content areas. Reading deficits can promote negative beliefs even in areas that involve little or no reading (e.g., mathematics; Licht & Kistner, 1986).

Variables associated with the instructional environment can forestall scholars enduring learning impediments from entering this cycle and can aid them in overcoming it (Friedman & Medway, 1987). Attributional feedback can alter scholars’ maladaptive achievement beliefs and behaviours. Pedagogues also need to furnish scholars with tasks they can accomplish and feedback highlighting progress towards learning goals (Schunk, 1995; Stipek, 2002). Stipek and Kowalski (1989) found that teaching task strategies to children who de-emphasised the role of effort raised their academic performance.

We shall now examine an important influence on motivation—self-concept, which has received much attention by researchers and practitioners as they attempt to understand scholar motivation and achievement.