Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Upcoming SlideShare
What to Upload to SlideShare
What to Upload to SlideShare
Loading in …3
1 of 69

Stop Shouting! I Can't Hear My Motivation Talking



Download to read offline

Presented at the 40th NSCA National Conference in Las Vegas on July 14th, 2017.

This presentation discusses the intersection between motor learning and motivation using self-determination theory as a guide. Learn how optimizing your athlete/client's sense of autonomy, competence, and relatedness leads to a motivational environment that nurtures skill development.

Stop Shouting! I Can't Hear My Motivation Talking

  1. 1. STOP SHOUTING! I Can’t Hear My Motivation Talking Nick Winkelman, PhD | Head of Athletic Performance & Science | Irish Rugby
  2. 2. mo·ti·va·tion: The reason or reasons one has for acting or behaving in a particular way
  3. 3. What do we typically think about when we hear the word ‘Motivation’?
  4. 4. Remember The Person That Gave Up? Neither does anyone else!
  5. 5. What do all these forms of motivation have in common? Externally Regulated
  6. 6. Is BEING motivated the same as being motivated? Probably Not
  7. 7. Empty
  8. 8. GONE
  9. 9. Alone
  10. 10. How sustainable and effective is this form of motivation?
  12. 12. Motivation 01 ‘Self-Determination Theory’
  13. 13. SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY Within social-cognitive theory, SDT proposes that intrinsic motivation emerges in accordance with the fulfillment of psychological needs SDT emphasizes the “role of the environment (i.e., coach) in fueling people’s perceptions of self-determined autonomy, competence, and relatedness” (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Mallett, 2005)
  14. 14. Autonomy (Control) CompetenceRelatedness SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY
  15. 15. Autonomy (Control) Competence Relatedness SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY The opportunity to govern one’s self; freedom from unwanted external control and influence; self-directed The ability and belief in one’s ability to successfully perform a task; self-efficacy The connection one has with others; shared empathy and the ability to relate to another person’s point of view
  16. 16. Intrinsic Motivation Integrated Regulation Identified Regulation Amotivation External Regulation Introjected Regulation Enjoyment, pleasure, and fun No rewards Integrated behaviors satisfying a psych- ological need Behaviors based on identified value to individual Lack of personal intention or causation Behaviors based on avoiding external punishment or gaining rewards Behaviors based on avoiding external disapproval or gaining approval Basic Psychological Needs Autonomy RelatednessCompetence Extrinsic Motivation High (Control) Autonomy Low (Control) Autonomy Integrated High LowInternalization (Ryan & Deci, 2007)
  17. 17. Internal (Intrinsic) Partially Internal External (Extrinsic) Partially External Sport is a part of who I am. I am driven to win, but I also love the environment and the competition I play sport because I enjoy the competition, but most of all, I love to win I play sport because I feel pressured to do so by my parents and coach I play sport because all of my friends play and I want to fit it Self-Determined Non Self-Determined High Internalization Low Internalization Motivation: Sport Example Amotivation There is no point trying as my success is unlikely or impossible Intrinsic I love sport and will continue playing throughout my life
  18. 18. How do I influence one’s Self- Determination as a coach?
  19. 19. Controlling Behaviors: “Pressure to think, feel, or behave in specified ways, thereby ignoring the person’s needs and feelings…Power-assertive…Pressure to comply.” (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003, p. 886)
  20. 20. Autonomy-Supportive Behaviors: “Takes the other’s perspective, acknowledges the other’s feelings, and provides the other with pertinent information and opportunities for choice, while minimizing the use of pressure and demands.” (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003, p. 886)
  21. 21. Motivation emerges when the basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness are fulfilled Motivation is multidimensional and changes based on the task, situation, and environment Coaches can affect motivation through developing controlling or autonomy-supportive environments Take Home Message
  22. 22. Should motivation just … motivate … or is there something else?
  23. 23. Motor Learning 02 ‘Self-Determination Theory’
  24. 24. More Effort & Persistence (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003)
  25. 25. Perform Better (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003)
  26. 26. (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003) Concentration
  27. 27. (Sanli et al., 2013) Providing individuals with controlled choice over a specific practice variable has been shown to improve motor learning and skill acquisition Choice No Choice
  28. 28. When given the opportunity to control feedback, individuals will request feedback less often the more they perform a task (Chiviacowsky et al., 2008)
  29. 29. When given the opportunity to control feedback, players will request feedback <30% of the time (as low as 7%) (Chiviacowsky et al., 2008; Janell et al., 1995/1997)
  30. 30. Players will request feedback after successful trials more often than they will request feedback after poor trials (Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002/2007)
  31. 31. (Wulf &Toole, 1999; Keetch & Lee, 2007; Andrieux et al., 2012 ) Providing individuals with choice over progressions and difficulty has been shown to improve motor learning and skill acquisition
  32. 32. Practice is individualised to the player (i.e., Feedback, Demonstrations, & Progressions) Players can request feedback after ‘good reps’ Players extract more information from demonstrations Self-control leads to higher motivation, active involvement in the learning process, and deeper information processing Take Home Message (Wulf, 2007)
  33. 33. How do I apply this principle in my setting?
  34. 34. Motivational Environment 03 ‘Autonomy…Competence...Relatedness’
  35. 35. mo·ti·va·tion; move·ment; mo·tor: Share the Latin Root movere, meaning to move
  36. 36. “Humans are more than neutral processors of information, and evidence suggests that learning is optimized by practice conditions that account for motivational factors.” (Lewthwaite & Wulf, 2012, p. 173)
  38. 38. Autonomy
  39. 39. Provide controlled choice when appropriate (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003)
  40. 40. (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003) Provide a rationale for programming elements and any training limitations
  41. 41. (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003) Acknowledge the player’s feelings and perspectives relative to the training process
  42. 42. (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003) Empower players to take initiative within and outside of the training process
  43. 43. Competence
  44. 44. Purposeful struggle engages the client while preserving their sense of competence Comfort Zone >80% Success “Sweet Spot” 50-80% Success Survival Zone <50 Success (Chiviacowsky et al., 2012; Coyle, 2012)
  45. 45. Low Beginner Intermediate Skilled Expert PotentialforLearning High Low HighTask Difficulty (Progression) = Optimal Task Difficulty Challenge Point Hypothesis (Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004)
  46. 46. (Nieuwenhuis et al., 2005; West et al., 2005) Positive feedback drives learning & motivation
  47. 47. (Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002/2007) Reinforce the good more often than correcting the bad
  48. 48. Provide feedback on the ‘Process’ over the ‘Person’ “I can see that your hard work is paying off, your pass/kick has improved” VS. “You have amazing ability” (Kamins & Dweck, 1999)
  50. 50. Group training environments create the strongest opportunity for relatedness
  51. 51. Create individual challenge within the context of a unified group effort…create a common bond
  52. 52. When possible create opportunities for individuals to PR and rally the team around their effort
  53. 53. Create a culture where individual and team success are one
  54. 54. Provide players with the opportunity to interact within the context of training sessions
  55. 55. Player interaction will result in peer coaching and observational learning
  56. 56. Give players a stage to be heard…Start and finish every session with a message…”Whose Got The Breakdown”
  57. 57. TAKE HOME MESSAGE 04
  58. 58. Optimizing the motivational climate involves a balance of contribution from the coach and the player
  59. 59. Autonomy-supportive environments enrich athletes and help them to feel “self-determined” in their development of competence and relatedness
  60. 60. Developing environments that drive relatedness act as a protective agent over an athlete’s competence and affirms their use of autonomy
  61. 61. 63© 2014 Athletes’ Performance, Inc. In the end… It is not about motivating the player, rather, it is about creating an environment that allows players to motivate themselves
  62. 62. _ Andrieux, M., Danna, J., & Thon, B. (2012). Self-control of task difficulty during training enhances motor learning of a complex coincidence-anticipation task. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 83(1), 27-35. _ Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G. (2002). Self-controlled feedback: Does it enhance learning because performers get feedback when they need it?. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 73(4), 408-415. _ Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G. (2007). Feedback after good trials enhances learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 78(2), 40-47. _ Chiviacowsky, S., Wulf, G., de Medeiros, F. L., Kaefer, A., & Tani, G. (2008). Learning benefits of self-controlled knowledge of results in 10-year-old children. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 79(3), 405-410. _ Chiviacowsky, S., Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2012). Self-controlled learning: the importance of protecting perceptions of competence. Frontiers in psychology, 3. REFERENCES
  63. 63. _ Coyle, D. (2012). The little book of talent: 52 tips for improving your skills. Random House LLC. _ Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior, 1985. _ Deci, E. L., & Flaste, R. (1995). Why we do what we do: The dynamics of personal autonomy. GP Putnam's Sons. _ Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological inquiry,11(4), 227-268. _ Guadagnoli, M. A., & Lee, T. D. (2004). Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. Journal of motor behavior, 36(2), 212-224. REFERENCES
  64. 64. _ Janelle, C. M., Kim, J., & Singer, R. N. (1995). Subject-controlled performance feedback and learning of a closed motor skill. Perceptual and motor skills,81(2), 627-634. _ Janelle, C. M., Barba, D. A., Frehlich, S. G., Tennant, L. K., & Cauraugh, J. H. (1997). Maximizing performance feedback effectiveness through videotape replay and a self-controlled learning environment. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 68(4), 269-279. _ Kamins, M. L., & Dweck, C. S. (1999). Person versus process praise and criticism: implications for contingent self-worth and coping. Developmental psychology, 35(3), 835. _ Keetch, K. M., & Lee, T. D. (2007). The effect of self-regulated and experimenter-imposed practice schedules on motor learning for tasks of varying difficulty. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 78(5), 476-486. _ Lewthwaite, R., & Wulf, G. (2012). 10 Motor learning through a motivational lens. Skill Acquisition in Sport: Research, Theory and Practice, 173. REFERENCES
  65. 65. _ Mageau, G. A., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). The coach–athlete relationship: A motivational model. Journal of sports science, 21(11), 883-904. _ Mallett, C. J. (2005). Self-Determination Theory: A Case Study of Evidence-Based Coaching. Sport psychologist, 19(4). _ Mouratidis, A., Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Sideridis, G. (2008). The motivating role of positive feedback in sport and physical education: evidence for a motivational model. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 30(2). _ Mouratidis, A., Lens, W., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2010). How you provide corrective feedback makes a difference: the motivating role of communicating in an autonomy-supporting way. Journal of sport & exercise psychology, 32(5). _ Nieuwenhuis, S., Slagter, H. A., Geusau, V., Alting, N. J., Heslenfeld, D. J., & Holroyd, C. B. (2005). Knowing good from bad: differential activation of human cortical areas by positive and negative outcomes. European Journal of Neuroscience, 21(11), 3161-3168. _ Pink, D. H. (2011). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. Penguin. REFERENCES
  66. 66. _ Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2007). Active human nature: Self-determination theory and the promotion and maintenance of sport, exercise, and health. Intrinsic motivation and self- determination in exercise and sport, 1-19. _ Sanli, E. A., Patterson, J. T., Bray, S. R., & Lee, T. D. (2012). Understanding self-controlled motor learning protocols through the self-determination theory.Frontiers in psychology, 3. _ Su, Y. L., & Reeve, J. (2011). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intervention programs designed to support autonomy. Educational Psychology Review, 23(1), 159-188. _ West, R. L., Bagwell, D. K., & Dark-Freudeman, A. (2005). Memory and goal setting: the response of older and younger adults to positive and objective feedback. Psychology and aging, 20(2), 195. REFERENCES
  67. 67. _ Wulf, G., & Toole, T. (1999). Physical assistance devices in complex motor skill learning: Benefits of a self-controlled practice schedule. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 70(3), 265-272. _ Wulf, G. (2007). Self-controlled practice enhances motor learning: implications for physiotherapy. Physiotherapy, 93(2), 96-101. _ Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2016). Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 23(5), 1382-1414. _ Wulf, G., Lewthwaite, R., Cardozo, P., & Chiviacowsky, S. (2017). Triple play: Additive contributions of enhanced expectancies, autonomy support, and external attentional focus to motor learning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1-22. REFERENCES