After reading Drive by Daniel Pink, I can’t help but compare his theory to that of what scientists suggest in “The Marshmallow Test”. Pink suggests that the mind of “Motivation 3.0″ is based on intrinsic rewards and not extrinsic rewards as was the case in “Motivation 2.0″. People will be motivated to continue their efforts in a given direction if it provides them with a higher quality of life and provides them with autonomy, mastery, and purpose. The Marshmallow Test suggests that people are motivated by extrinsic rewards and children that show a strong sense of self-regulation and self-control go on to live lives that are more successful.
This leads me to wonder: if Pink is correct that intrinsic values are more motivating than extrinsic ones, do we need to devise a new type of Marshmallow test, or does the Marshmallow Test maintain its relevance and significance regardless of motivational type? I could see this either way and will continue to ponder my response, but I figured I would throw it out there for everyone to consider.
Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.
Hi Aaron.
Thanks very much for the interesting post!
You’ve drawn an interesting comparison between the content of Pink’s DRIVE and Mischel’s Marshmallow test. On the surface, I agree that it may seem the two researchers/authors are in conflict, with Pink supporting intrinsic motivation and Mischel suggesting external motivation is a driving force of human behavior.
I think if we look at the Marshmallow test from a different perspective, it might appear they both support the same position. I see the Marshmallow test not as a test of the effectiveness of an external reward as a motivator, but rather as a test of the internal willpower of the children serving as subjects.
The notion of delayed gratification, displayed through willpower, is central to the Marshmallow test, and Mischel’s longitudinal study attempted to connect future success to whether or not a student was able to survive the temptation of the marshmallow.
I’ve shown my staff information on the Marshmallow test (Jorge Posada’s presentation on TED) as a way of supporting the work we were doing as a school to focus on developing the emotional intelligence of our students. I consider it to be related to the notion of building internal motivation to succeed in school as well. Thinking about the concept of delayed gratification, vs. the power of the external reward represented by the marshmallow, suggests to me Mischel’s work is more similar to Pink’s premise than not.
Do you think it makes a difference if we look at Mischel’s work in that context when putting DRIVE and the Marhsmallow test side by side?
Thanks again for the great post. I enjoy your blog and your contributions on Twitter!
Cheers
@acmcdonaldgp
http://www.over40andstillinschool.blogspot.com
Alexander,
I have actually been thinking more and more about this post throughout today as I watched my kids work. I really don’t know how to compare the two works side-by-side. It’s something I have been doing battle with for a couple weeks now mainly because I am not sure how confident I am in Pink’s “Motivation 3.0″ theory. I think that the theory and mindset itself is something that we can consider, but I wonder if people have to experience and live past “Motivation 2.0″ before they can enter the 3.0 realm. It seems as though our “Age of Abundance” (described in Pink’s book A Whole New Mind) was the catalyst for creating Motivation 3.0, and I am not sure that anyone can jump right into a 3.0 mindset. All of this really clouds my ability to compare Mischel and Pink’s theories.
I am doing more thinking about this and will probably post a follow-up tomorrow morning.
Thanks for your many kind words. My hope is always to stimulate thought amidst us all. Hopefully that comes out in my activities online and in meetings at school.
AE
@Alexander (sandy) McDonald
Thanks for highlighting this post Aaron. As I re-read my comment I realized I erred on the name of the TED presenter I reference.
The presenter’s name is Joachim de Posada, and his 6 minute presentation on the marshmallow test can be found here: http://www.ted.com/talks/joachim_de_posada_says_don_t_eat_the_marshmallow_yet.html
Perhaps it is delicious irony he had to wait to receive the appropriate recognition from me? Delayed gratification and all….
Cheers
Alex,
No worries. I retweeted this today because I have been thinking more and more about it as I am reading David Shenk’s, “The Genius in All of Us”. I was fortunate enough to get my hands on an advanced copy. I know I am no cognitive scientist, but I feel like there is a way to generate some more discussion over how we assess student intelligence within the context that they WANT to be observed. More on this to come.
Thanks again!