What is the difference between (and importance of) extrinsic vs. intrinsic rewards in gamification?

What is the difference between (and importance of) extrinsic vs. intrinsic rewards in gamification?

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

What is the definition of extrinsic and intrinsic rewards?

Why are they important to, and what is their role in, gamification?

Intrinsic Rewards (motivation) These are rewards which are directly of value to the person, rather being something that represents (or could be "traded in") for something to of value.

So getting a badge in and of itself isn't an Intrinsic Reward, but up votes on an answer would be b/c it converts Status and Validation of the user's work. These rewards are also intrinsic to the task. They have not been "bolted on" or "dangled like a carrot" in front of the user.

Extrinsic Rewards (or incentives) are rewards which are not naturally a part of the task. So if you enjoy drawing and I compliment you on the drawing that's intrinsica. If I offer to pay you to draw more, that's extrinsic.

from this slideshow.

Extrinsic Incentives are demotivating and, thus, should be avoided in Gamifying a system There is a lot of research that shows that Extrinsic Rewards are demotivating because: They extinguish internal motivation

  • Result in Habituation, requiring higher levels of the External reward to achieve the same effects.

  • Send a message that you think they should not want to do this (why else would you need to bribe them)

  • Seem manipulative

Therefore, Extrinsic Rewards should be avoided. And if you find that your "players" are focused more on the game mechanics than the work then that's a clue that your game mechanics may be offering extrinsic motivation.

Intrinsic reward is the emotional pay-off that you get by completing an activity.

Extrinsic reward is everything else.

For example, In an real game, the sense of accomplishment that you get after completing a level is intrinsic, all the points and badges are extrinsic rewards.

Introducing Intrinsic rewards in gamification is not trivial, you have make the activity fun, memorable and truly satisfying.

Having said that, extrinsic reward can trigger intrinsic reward. For example, I will get a really great felling of having contributed something great to this site when you vote up on this answer!

According to Frederick Herzberg's two-factor theory of motivation,

intrinsic rewards are motivators (e.g. challenging work, recognition, responsibility) that give positive satisfaction,

while extrinsic rewards are hygiene factors (e.g. status, job security, salary, fringe benefits, work conditions) that prevent dissatisfaction.

Intrinsic rewards related to the job content (i.e. they are intrinsic to the job), while extrinsic rewards related to job context (they are extrinsic to the job).


1) In Herzberg's theory, satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not two extremes along one dimension, but two independent factors:

traditional theory: dissatisfaction <------------------------------> satisfaction Herzberg's theory: no dissatisfaction |------------------------------> dissatisfaction no satisfaction |------------------------------> satisfaction


Intrinsic motivaton is caused by a intrinsic process ("I like doing this") or an internal self-concept ("I am the kind of person who does this").

Extrinsic motivation is instrumental ("I do this to achieva a goal"), caused by an external self-concept ("People expect me to do this"), or goal internalization ("I must do this for ").

Different terminology is listed here:

This discussion of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation covers most of what you are after.

A reward is intrinsic to an activity if it comes from doing the task itself. A reward is extrinsic if otherwise. The classic extrinsic reward is money. Classic intrinsic rewards are challenge and stimulation.

I feel that there is a misnomer here… a reward is a reward.
There are Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivators.

Intrinsic - The feel good motivation you get from within for accomplishing of completing a task. Because it felt good, you want to do more. This could be classified as a reward, but generally speaking an emotional response isn't necessarily a reward. Generally in Gamification a reward is a tangible or virtual gift given to the user for completing a task - an extrinsic component.

Extrinsic - An enticing benefit will be earned/granted if you complete the challenge/task so you follow through to completion to earn the gift. Extrinsic motivators are rewards. One is coaxed into finishing the task because of the reward, not the good feeling of accomplishment.

At the risk of pulling users away from this site, and plopping them down at the newly launched Gamification site, I thought I may post these questions here that directly relate to your question:

I will reuse what I posted on the Gamification site for this answer as it applies here as well. There is a great Ted talk on the "Puzzle of Motivation" by Dan Pink is available. It is a short talk, but it discusses this exact topic. I think you will find it enlightening.

Career analyst Dan Pink examines the puzzle of motivation, starting with a fact that social scientists know but most managers don't: Traditional rewards aren't always as effective as we think. Listen for illuminating stories - and maybe, a way forward.

Equity Theory

What if you spent 30 hours working on a class report, did everything you were supposed to do, and handed in an excellent assignment (in your opinion). Your roommate, on the other hand, spent about five hours and put everything together at the last minute. You know, moreover, that he ignored half the requirements and never even ran his assignment through a spell-checker. A week later, your teacher returns the reports. You get a C and your roommate gets a B . In all likelihood, you’ll feel that you’ve been treated unfairly relative to your roommate.

Your reaction makes sense according to the equity theory of motivation, which focuses on our perceptions of how fairly we’re treated relative to others. Applied to the work environment, this theory proposes that employees analyze their contributions or job inputs (hours worked, education, experience, work performance) and their rewards or job outcomes (salary, bonus, promotion, recognition). Then they create a contributions/rewards ratio and compare it to those of other people. The basis of comparison can be any one of the following:

  • Someone in a similar position.
  • Someone holding a different position in the same organization.
  • Someone with a similar occupation.
  • Someone who shares certain characteristics (such as age, education, or level of experience).
  • Oneself at another point in time.

When individuals perceive that the ratio of their contributions to rewards is comparable to that of others, they perceive that they’re being treated fairly or equitably when they perceive that the ratio is out of balance, they perceive inequity. Occasionally, people will perceive that they’re being treated better than others. More often, however, they conclude that others are being treated better (and that they themselves are being treated worse). This is what you concluded when you saw your grade in the previous example. You’ve calculated your ratio of contributions (hours worked, research and writing skills) to rewards (project grade), compared it to your roommate’s ratio, and concluded that the two ratios are out of balance.

What will an employee do if he or she perceives an inequity? The individual might try to bring the ratio into balance, either by decreasing inputs (working fewer hours, not taking on additional tasks) or by increasing outputs (asking for a raise). If this strategy fails, an employee might complain to a supervisor, transfer to another job, leave the organization, or rationalize the situation (e.g., deciding that the situation isn’t so bad after all). Equity theory advises managers to focus on treating workers fairly, especially in determining compensation, which is, naturally, a common basis of comparison.

Figure 11.4: Equity Theory—Inputs Should Balance With Outcomes

Why are intrinsic rewards important?

There are two broad categories of rewards that managers might keep in their toolkit to increase motivation among team members𠅎xtrinsic and intrinsic rewards. Extrinsic rewards include tangible rewards such as a monetary bonus or an extra day off of work. They are controlled by people other than you. Intrinsic rewards are intangible, psychological rewards that you get from a job well done. These vary from person to person and include things like a sense of pride, personal fulfillment from completing an activity, gaining a new skill and feeling like an important part of a team.

Some ideas for your own games

Extrinsic motivators aren’t bad and are naturally present in games. Think of any form of punishment such as failing a level, losing a life or losing a battle. But also reward such as a score or stars you get for finishing a level. Time is also often used in games as an external motivator, to pressure players. Think about solving a puzzle within a certain time. Another extrinsic motivator is competition, especially because it is rewarding for the player(s) who won. It can also motivate the others to try harder next time. And then there are extrinsic motivators that are less part of a game like daily rewards you get if you log in to the game every day or notifications to remind you that you haven’t played yet today.

When designing more for intrinsic motivators keep this quote in mind: “The reward is the activity itself” (Ryan & Deci, 2002). People will play your game because they enjoy playing your game, it is that simple. Rely more on the natural curiosity people have. What if you design a match-3 game with power-ups. You can choose to create guided tutorials and explain to players how to create and use them. But what if you choose to leave those tutorials out and leave it up to the player to discover what is possible? Ask yourself if someone can play the game without understanding this mechanic or feature. In that case, maybe you should leave it to the player’s curiosity to discover the feature or mechanic. Of course, you might consider a tutorial if your game is not playable before the player understands the mechanic or feature. You can also try to make your game “easy to play, hard to master”. Mastery is one of those intrinsic motivators that will make people play a game or level over and over. You could even consider adding an extrinsic motivator in the form on competition to create some social pressure. I always find it important to ask questions during the design process. Some good questions to ask yourself if you are designing a mobile game where retention is important are:

  • Why will player’s want to come back to my game?
  • Are they given a reward for login every day?

Could it be they only play because they get a reward that is useful in your game? Maybe they don’t play your game because they like it anymore, but because of the rewards. But maybe you design a game that requires players to think creatively or to find a solution to the puzzle outside the box. It might not be a good idea to include too many rewards or punishments, player since people who are offered a reward become distracted by it and their creativity suffers (Glucksberg, 1962). Try to stay away from time limits, they can make it harder for players to come up with a solution.

The impact of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on the job satisfaction of dentists

The Two-Factor Theory of job satisfaction distinguishes between intrinsic-motivation (i.e. recognition, responsibility) and extrinsic-hygiene (i.e. job security, salary, working conditions) factors. The presence of intrinsic-motivation facilitates higher satisfaction and performance, whereas the absences of extrinsic factors help mitigate against dissatisfaction. The consideration of these factors and their impact on dentists' job satisfaction is essential for the recruitment and retention of dentists.

Objectives: The objective of the study is to assess the level of job satisfaction of German dentists and the factors that are associated with it.

Methods: This cross-sectional study was based on a job satisfaction survey. Data were collected from 147 dentists working in 106 dental practices. Job satisfaction was measured with the 10-item Warr-Cook-Wall job satisfaction scale. Organizational characteristics were measured with two items. Linear regression analyses were performed in which each of the nine items of the job satisfaction scale (excluding overall satisfaction) were handled as dependent variables. A stepwise linear regression analysis was performed with overall job satisfaction as the dependent outcome variable, the nine items of job satisfaction and the two items of organizational characteristics controlled for age and gender as predictors.

Results: The response rate was 95.0%. Dentists were satisfied with 'freedom of working method' and mostly dissatisfied with their 'income'. Both variables are extrinsic factors. The regression analyses identified five items that were significantly associated with each item of the job satisfaction scale: 'age', 'mean weekly working time', 'period in the practice', 'number of dentist's assistant' and 'working atmosphere'. Within the stepwise linear regression analysis the intrinsic factor 'opportunity to use abilities' (β = 0.687) showed the highest score of explained variance (R(2) = 0.468) regarding overall job satisfaction.

Conclusions: With respect to the Two-Factor Theory of job satisfaction both components, intrinsic and extrinsic, are essential for dentists but the presence of intrinsic motivating factors like the opportunity to use abilities has most positive impact on job satisfaction. The findings of this study will be helpful for further activities to improve the working conditions of dentists and to ensure quality of care.

Strategic Synergy

Dan Ariely, a Professor of Psychology and Behavioral Economics at Duke University wrote a book titled Predictably Irrational where he describes the difference between Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivators and how these affect management decisions in driving employee behavior . Ariely suggests that moving from extrinsic motivators or rewards such as money, points or schedules, to intrinsic motivators or internal needs including friendship, commitments , and loyalty, is in essence making a move from a market relationship to a social relationship.

An extrinsic or market relationship in this case is defined by the exchange of monetary currency for a product or service. An Intrinsic or social relationship is the exchange of an intangible for a product or service. Ariely illustrates this differentiation in his book with a Thanksgiving dinner scenario, also retold by Jeff Monday in the video below:

Imagine you are at your in-laws house for Thanksgiving. At the end of the fantastic meal you walk over to your mother-in-law and instead of giving her the customary social payment of a big hug and thank you, you pull out your wallet and ask her how much she wants for the meal. Here is where the behavioral economics get interesting. Even if you were to offer her $1000 for the meal, a meal that only cost her only a couple hundred dollars and a few hours of her time, she and everyone else at the table will be offended because they will feel you cheapened the day.

Why? Well behavioral economics show us that the intangibles like love, gratitude, trust, and community that we receive in a social exchange are difficult to put a value on, so difficult in fact, that we can’t calculate them and value them as priceless. By offering the $1000 to your mother in law for the Thanksgiving dinner you are putting a cheap value on something that is priceless in her mind. This inequity is caused by trying to blend a social exchange with a market exchange and it is an important lesson for managers who are moving to a management style with greater intrinsic motivators.

Jeff Monday’s video discussing Ariely’s intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (approx 5 minutes):

The Thanksgiving dinner example can be described within a gaming context, as Sebastian Deterding presents in his slideshow Pawned. Gamification and its Discontents. Deterding shares a similar scenario where an extrinsic motivator interfered with intrinsic needs:

…adding explicit rule systems to a given conduct can mess with the implicit social rules, norms and meanings governing it. Take akoha, a service that tries to promote random acts of kindness by casting them as “missions” you collect awards and gifts for. Now a befriended game designer of mine tried this with another game designer friend of his and invited him for a coffee, as the mission required. When the friend curiously asked why he was invited, my friend replied in explaining the service and mission he was on. To which the friend furiously answered:

“Have you any idea how degrading that is, being invited not because you care about me, but because you want to progress in some game?”

We have learned that game rewards or points can cause conflict when it is the primary motivator in exchange for a friend’s intrinsic social needs. But what would happen if the motivations in this scenario were instead presented in this fashion:

“Would you like to meet for coffee and play this social game together?”

So rather than suggesting the points are the primary reward, the player presents an opportunity to build upon a social relationship as the main motivator. This is a similar positioning to the popular social game “Words with Friends”, where players can “catch up with friends as you kick their butts in a word game”. Taking it a step further and offering both parties added synergies in game play will enforce the link, emphasizing the importance of the relationship. The Washington Post reported on social bonds created in online games:

The most popular social games are collaborations. To progress quickly through the games, you need to help other players, and they need to help you. Such collaborations, according to game designers and users, foster a sense of community in an often-splintered world.

In our examples, shifting focus to an intrinsic value would probably have produced a stronger relationship, even when external motivators are part of the system. However, that doesn’t mean we ignore extrinsic motivators altogether, as Steven Reiss, a Professor of Psychology at Ohio State University argues,

“Individuals differ enormously in what makes them happy – for some competition, winning and wealth are the greatest sources of happiness, but for others, feeling competent or socializing may be more satisfying. The point is that you can’t say some motivations, like money, are inherently inferior.”

The illustration above offers a perspective where intrinsically positioned game mechanics can act as facilitators for social activity and exchanges. Games give us an effective framework to bond with others. Interestingly enough, as soon as we try to measure those intrinsic mechanics we move them into the realm of external motivators. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, as the number of Twitter followers or friends on Facebook influence us in different ways. But we want to try to build systems where externals aren’t the only things available. Internationally-known metagame expert and social game designer Amy Jo Kim describes game mechanics as the sauce or seasoning on the meat of the core game. Designers need a great core game and should use game mechanics to help improve it. Game mechanics as extrinsic tools like experience bars or achievements will push the player to reach the next goal. But things of intrinsic value will always provide greater incentive for the player.

Dan Ariely’s video discussing experiments in motivation:

Another part of Ariely’s discussion, Motivation in the Knowledge Economy:

Left Brain (Extrinsic) vs Right Brain (Intrinsic) Core Drives in Gamification

A key aspect of the Octalysis Framework is the difference between *Left Brain and Right Brain Core Drives*.

The Left Brain Core Drives involve tendencies related to logic, ownership, and analytical thought. They are expressed in the following three Core Drives:

  • Core Drive 2: Development & Accomplishment
  • Core Drive 4: Ownership & Possession
  • Core Drive 6: Scarcity & Impatience

The Right Brain Core Drives are characterized by creativity, sociality, and curiosity and as illustrated by the following:

  • Core Drive 3: Empowerment of Creativity & Feedback
  • Core Drive 5: Social Influence & Relatedness
  • Core Drive 7: Unpredictability & Curiosity

(Note: there will be several points later in this chapter where you may find the need to refer back to the reference above.)

Not Literally Left or Right Side

Again, it is worth noting that the terminology of “Left Brain Core Drives” and “Right Brain Core Drives” does not necessarily mean that they are physically located on the left side or right side of our brains. These references are merely symbolic in that some of the Core Drives are influenced more by the “logical brain,” while other Core Drives are influenced more by the “emotional brain.”

There have been past instances where some individuals have tried to attack my work, pinpointing how the “left brain vs. right brain” model has been debunked and therefore is no longer scientifically valid. From my perspective, this is simply an issue of semantics, for I could very well name the emotional Core Drives, “Rainbow Core Drives” and the logical Core Drives, “Stone Core Drives” – which would actually give a nice, game-like ring to them.

However, the current terminology is ideal for design purposes, as the “left/right brain” terminology is popularly understood in the social sciences. Therefore I designed the Left Brain Core Drives to be conveniently located on the left side of the octagon and the Right Brain Core Drives to be situated to the right. I’m a designer by trade rather than an academic, so even though I don’t see anything wrong with the Left/Right Brain terminology to begin with, I prefer tools that are useful over ones that are simply semantically accurate.

I believe that my intended goal to organize these Core Drives into intuitive patterns within a visually clear diagram was successful. This allows me and my students to follow complex motivational and behavioral design principles in an approachable manner. In turn, this enables us to design experiences that ensure long-term metrics are sustained.

Conveniently, the Left/Right Brain framework structure also allows us to differentiate and design for the differences between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation.

Extrinsic vs Intrinsic Motivation

The grouping of Left Brain and Right Brain Core Drives with correlated to what many motivational theorists understand as Extrinsic Motivation and Intrinsic Motivation.

Extrinsic Motivation is motivation that is derived from a goal, purpose, or reward. The task itself is not necessarily interesting or appealing, but because of the goal or reward, people become driven and motivated to complete the task. More often than not, people go to work everyday not because they actually love doing the work, but because they want to make a living, advance their careers, and be recognized for higher achievements.

For example, lets say you have a terrible job. Your job is to dig feces out of the ground for hours everyday. It’s labor intensive, smells horrible, and you hate the job with a passion. But then someone shows up and says, “I’ll give you $10,000 for every single piece of dung you dig out.”

All of a sudden, you become excited and extremely motivated to dig, thinking, “Wow! This is easy money! Hahaha!” You’re now engaged, joyful, and motivated with the job. Morale is high, and you start working much faster than you did before.

However, it is important to remember that the *task* itself is still not fun. You are motivated because the extrinsic reward is extremely appealing, and it creates the illusion that you enjoy the activity. Once the extrinsic reward is gone, you will go back to hating the task – and possibly more so than before, as we will see soon.

Intrinsic Motivation, on the other hand, is simply the motivation you get by inherently enjoying the task itself. These are things you would even *pay* money to do because you enjoy doing them so much. For instance, you don’t need to reach any target to enjoy utilizing your creativity you don’t need a physical reward to enjoy hanging out with your friends and you don’t need any compensation to be absorbed by the suspense of unpredictability.

In fact, when you go to a casino, you have the opposite of a reward. Most people know that they are “statistically screwed” by the casino – that’s how the casinos make so much money. But they still come out saying, “I lost $200, but I had so much fun!” Why? Because, throughout those five hours, they were constantly thinking, “Maybe I’ll win this time!”

They are spending $200 to buy the intrinsic joy of “possibly” winning. If the unpredictability is removed and people know with absolute certainty that they will get $40 after pressing those buttons for five hours, they will no longer think it is fun. In fact, it would become very similar to the dreadful *work* of laboring in a factory.

Left Brain Core Drives are by nature goal-oriented, while Right Brain Core Drives are experience-oriented. Extrinsic Motivation focuses on results, while Intrinsic Motivation focuses on the process.

Slight Semantic Differences with the Self-Determination Theory

Intrinsic Motivation versus Extrinsic Motivation is a popular topic within the gamification space and was heavily popularized by Daniel Pink’s book Drive. The book explores how instead of being motivated by money (Core Drive 4: Ownership & Possession) and punishment (Core Drive 8: Loss & Avoidance), people are motivated more by *Purpose*, *Autonomy*, and *Mastery*.

While I believe Drive, as well as the Self-Determination Theory it advocates, are fantastic, I should point out that my terminology differs slightly from Pink on what Intrinsic Motivation consists of.

When a basketball player practices by shooting hoops a thousand times a day, their motivation is to achieve Mastery, something that is characterized as Intrinsic Motivation within Pink’s theories. However, within the Octalysis Framework, the activity itself is still monotonous and boring. It is only motivating because the athlete has a goal – an extrinsic motivation. That said, we will look at how Self- Determination Theory connects with White Hat Motivation within my framework in the next chapter.)

Here is the test I usually apply to determine if something is extrinsically or intrinsically motivated: if the goal or objective were removed, would the person still be motivated to take the Desired Action or not?

In other words, at the end of the day, if the basketball player knows that whatever they do, they will lose all “progress” and everything obtained or accumulated, would they still choose to shoot hoops?

Social hangouts and creative activities, such as solving fun puzzles, will pass the test for intrinsic motivation. However, accumulating goods, earning points, or even progressing towards mastery would likely not. What would you spend time doing if you knew the world was surely going to end tomorrow? It would be unlikely that you will decide to practice shooting basketball hoops – though you may decide to play a game of basketball with those you love and care about.

Again, these are simply differences in terminology and grouping, not a fundamental difference in beliefs about what motivates people. Daniel Pink only differentiates between Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation, while I classify using the extra dimension of White Hat versus Black Hat motivation. (You will see that Mastery falls into the White Hat camp of motivation.) Hence our categorization and language differ slightly, while our overall beliefs in the nature and effectiveness of these drives do not.)

In a similar fashion, Michael Wu, Chief Scientist of the engagement platform Lithium, differentiates between Intrinsic/Extrinsic Motivation and Intrinsic/Extrinsic Rewards.

Motivation is what drives us to do any action, and Rewards are what we obtain once we perform the Desired Action.

A person may receive Intrinsic *Rewards* after performing a certain task, such as gaining the appreciation of others or feeling a sense of accomplishment. However, since Intrinsic *Motivation* is derived from the activity itself without concern for the future outcome, if a person does something for any reward, including any Intrinsic Reward, it is not based on Intrinsic Motivation.

This is slightly tricky to comprehend, but along the lines of Michael Wu’s concepts, Core Drive 2: Development & Accomplishment may utilize Intrinsic Rewards, but ultimately does not focus on Intrinsic Motivation. The Left Brain Core Drives are result (goal) focused, while the Right Brain Core Drives are process (journey) focused. Core Drive 2 focuses on progress and achievements, and as a result is based on Extrinsic Motivation in my framework.

Examples of Extrinsic Motivation

Examples of extrinsic motivation include:

  • Salary
  • Bonuses
  • Promotions
  • Job security
  • Benefits
  • Flexible hours

Keeping an extrinsically motivated employee happy may be difficult if you don’t offer him what he needs to feel successful. For instance, an employee who is motivated by promotions and salary increases can lose his drive if he knows there is no room for growth at the company.

The Difference Between Extrinsic & Intrinsic Motivation

Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations are behavioral forces that drive individuals towards gaining or accomplishing a particular end. The major difference between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation is that intrinsic motivation is an internalized motivation, whereas extrinsic motivation is based upon external stimuli such as rewards and punishments. Examples of intrinsic motivation would be feelings of satisfaction from a job well-done, admiration from boss or peers for success, wishing to be the best, wishing to be successful, not wishing to fail, etc… Extrinsic motivation is generally seen as a rewards and punishment system. Doing the job correct and receiving a monetary bonus, success brings a promotion, threat of being fired for making a mistake, the promise of commission, etc…

A example of extrinsic motivation can be seen when a person finishes a hard week of work and treats themself to a milkshake. This reward for having worked hard is external and tangible. Although this reward makes a person happy the sense of accomplishment at the end of the week is a far greater reward. Feeling this way is an important part of a great reward.

The key to understanding these different motivating forces is to understand that intrinsic motivation is contextual in nature and may change over time. Feelings of accomplishment can change as challenges in a job become easier for workers. These changes can lead to boredom and dissatisfaction. As well, extrinsic motivations can become expected if given too often or consistently over time. For these reasons, it is better to be motivated intrinsically. Individuals who are motivated extrinsically tend to seek tangible rewards in situations and there many situations in which these types of rewards are not available. For instance, if a person is motivated extrinsically than relationships with others can take on selfish forms in which acts are viewed in a quid pro quo manner at the cost of loyalty and other important values.

What drives us to do the things we do? What is it that pushes us to accomplish things? A simple answer would be personal gain, but the question is much more complex than that. There are many ways to look at the concept of motivation, one of which is to examine motivation examples.

A key ability of successful people is that they know how to motivate themselves effectively. The skill of being able to start and finish tasks rigorously is what solidifies their chances at being successful overall. But what kind of motivation is most important? Is it motivation that arises from outside the individual (extrinsic), or motivation that arises from inside the individual (intrinsic)?

There are benefits to both types of motivation, each with their own set of respective effects on behaviours and how people choose to pursue goals. In order to understand how these types of motivation influence human action and a drive for success, we must first understand what each one is.

In a hurry? Take the infographic to go!

Watch the video: What is the difference between a game and gamification? -- Ayogo Qu0026A (May 2022).