MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120819632 · doi:10.1037/a0026377

From motivation to passion: In search of the motivational processes involved in a meaningful life.

2012· article· en· W2120819632 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPassionPsychologyPerspective (graphical)HonourSelf-determination theorySocial psychologySport psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this address, I present an overview of research on motivational processes that has been conducted by my research team over past 30 years. Such research subscribes to an organismic view of human motivation wherein people are seen as active agents who strive to fulfill their potential. Four lines of research are briefly presented: (a) role of social factors in intrinsic motivation; (b) determinants and outcomes of motivational processes in real-life settings; (c) an integrative perspective on role of personality, task, and social factors in motivational processes and outcomes (the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation); and (d) a new perspective on passion for life activities (the dualistic model on passion). Key studies are highlighted and some conclusions are drawn. Keywords: passion, motivation, self-determination theory, positive psychology Donald O. Hebb was an outstanding scientist and a visionary on contribution of psychology to human condition. It is thus with great honour that I receive 201 1 Donald O. Hebb Award for distinguished contributions to psychology as a science. I accept this award as captain of my research team. Without contribution of all team members, die research conducted over years could not have been done. I also see this award as positive feedback on quality of research in which Canadian motivation researchers engage (to this effect, see 2008 special issue of Canadian Psychology edited by Vallerand, Pelletier, & Koestner, 2008). For last 30 years or so, my research and that of my colleagues has focused on scientific study of motivational processes. This address charts progress that my own thinking and that of my colleagues have gone through during this period. While I review some of our research conducted over 1980-2010 period, I also reflect upon Zeitgeist of time during which such research was conducted. Thus, present article may also provide a fertile background to reexamine evolution of human motivation research during mis period. In doing so, I focus on four lines of research: (a) role of social factors in intrinsic and extrinsic motivation; (b) determinants and outcomes of motiprocesses in real-life settings; (c) an integrative perspecon die role of personality, task, and social factors in motivational processes and outcomes; and finally (d) a new perspective passion for life activities. As we shall see, there is a link across four research thrusts: search for motivational proinvolved in living a meaningful life. The Role of Social Factors in Intrinsic Motivation Motivation can be defined as: the hypothetical construct used describe internal and/or external forces that produce direction, intensity, and persistence of behaviour & Thill, 1993, p. 18; translated from French). Motivahas been studied from several perspectives. For example, perspectives have focused on instinctual drives (e.g., Freud, 1962/1923), whereas others have focused on environmental con(Skinner, 1953). While radically different, these two nevertheless share a fundamental assumption: people are organisms who merely react to internal or external stimuli. subscribe to a more comprehensive theoretical perspective that individual as an active organism striving for effective with environment in hope of growing as an (see Deci, 1980; Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000; Vallerand, 1997) and living a meaningful life (Seligman & Csiksentmihalyi, This organismic metafheoretical approach has guided much my conceptual thinking. Over years, researchers have come to identify two major of motivated behavior. The first deals with behavior perfor itself, in order to experience pleasure and satisfaction in activity, and has been called intrinsic motivation 1975). The second, which involves performing behavior in order to achieve some separable goal such as receiving rewards or avoiding punishment, has been termed extrinsic motivation (Deci, 1980, Deci & Ryan 1985). …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it