Negative Effects of Reward on Intrinsic Motivation—A Limited Phenomenon: Comment on Deci, Koestner, and Ryan (2001)

TLDR

The use of rewards in education is feared to undermine students’ intrinsic motivation, a concern highlighted by Deci, Koestner, and Ryan’s meta‑analysis that suggests rewards substantially diminish intrinsic interest. The comment argues that reward does not inherently have a negative effect on intrinsic motivation. The authors organize studies using cognitive evaluation theory, contrasting Deci et al.’s aggregation across reward procedures with a more detailed categorization by actual procedures. When studies are grouped by specific reward procedures, negative effects are limited to particular circumstances, whereas collapsing across procedures yields pervasive negative effects.

Abstract

A major concern in educational settings is that the use of rewards and incentives may destroy students’ intrinsic motivation to perform activities. In collaboration with other researchers, the author conducted a meta-analysis of the literature that showed that negative effects of reward were limited and easily avoidable (Cameron & Pierce, 1994; Eisenberger & Cameron, 1996 ). Deci, Koestner, and Ryan (2001) suggest that our work was seriously flawed; they present a summary of their meta-analysis on the topic (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999a) and claim that rewards do substantially undermine intrinsic interest. In this comment, it is argued that there is no inherent negative property of reward. By organizing studies according to cognitive evaluation theory, Deci et al. (1999a) collapsed across distinct reward procedures and were able to obtain pervasive negative effects. When studies are organized according to the actual procedures used, however, negative effects are limited to a specific set of circumstances.