A growing body of literature indicates that motivation can critically shape long-term memory formation in the service of adaptive behavior. In the present chapter, we review recent cognitive neuroscience evidence of motivational influences on memory, with a focus on anatomical pathways by which neuromodulatory networks support encoding-related activity in distinct subregions of the medial temporal lobe. We argue that engagement of distinct neural circuits as a function of motivational context at encoding leads to formation of different memory representations, supporting different patterns of adaptive behavior. We present a novel neurocognitive model, the Interrogative/Imperative model of information-seeking, to account for pursuit of learning goals. Interrogative or imperative modes of information-seeking are often, but not necessarily, associated with approach or avoidance motivation, respectively. We also discuss additional influences on motivated memory encoding, including intrinsic motivation, curiosity, choice, and cognitive control processes. Taken together, this body of research suggests that the nature of memory representations depends on an individual's neurophysiological response to, rather than extrinsic qualities of, a given motivational manipulation or context at the time of encoding. Finally, we discuss potential applications of these research findings to real-life educational settings and directions for future research.

In this chapter we examine measures and methods that have come to prominence over the last two decades exploring how they build on, and are shaped by, relevant theory. In addition, we identify how contemporary measures and methods have expanded as researchers investigate interactive influences of person and context. First, the importance of distinguishing levels of generality and specificity in definitions of motivation constructs is explored. Second, we examine attempts to define the type of relation between motivation constructs and learning, for example, mediation relations and reciprocal relations. As specific research is considered we direct attention to the types of analytic procedures that have been used to test hypotheses and assess models of the relations between motivation and learning. In particular we highlight the development of research methods that go beyond the range of insights into motivation and learning that can be achieved using only self-report questionnaires.

In this chapter, an overview of the concept of choice provision and a discussion of the benefits and detriments of providing choice for motivation and learning in educational contexts is discussed. A review of the theoretical perspectives explaining how and why choice may have benefits, and sometimes detriments, is provided. In reviewing the relevant theories and the corresponding empirical evidence, we highlight a diverse set of perspectives – motivational, cognitive, social, and neuroscientific – to provide a nuanced understanding of the role of choice in educational settings. We focus the second half of the chapter on areas of contention within choice theory and research, including a discussion of the conceptual confluence of choice and autonomy and the various characteristics of individuals, tasks, choices, classrooms, and cultures that predict divergent choice effects. In closing the chapter, we discuss the implications of this research for educational practice and make recommendations for future research.

While research on neuroscience posits that intrinsic and extrinsic incentives involve a single, common psychological process based on a reinforcement learning model (forming a “commonality view” on motivation), research in psychology has made a strong distinction between these two types of incentives (forming a “multifaceted view” on motivation), often even viewing them as competitive. Although they are not necessarily contradictory, I argue that these two meta-theoretical views have biased and prevented our comprehensive understanding of motivation and its relation to learning. I suggest ways that these different perspectives can inform each other, contributing to our broader understanding of human motivation and learning. These examples include the effects of reward on learning, the way people can transform one type of motivation to another, and a rewarding view for effort, challenge, and negative feedback. The arguments presented in this chapter underscore the vital importance of cross-disciplinary work on motivation and learning in future studies.

There is a long history of thought and research in the social sciences that views human beings as engaged in entirely instrumental activities in pursuit of goals that typically give them pleasure. This view makes a sharp distinction between “means” and “ends,” and treats the relation between means and ends as essentially arbitrary. Forty years of research on “intrinsic motivation” presents a different view, suggesting that some activities are themselves ends. In this chapter, we argue that distinguishing between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation has been important, but that the current understanding of the distinction is not adequate to capture the most important dimensions of difference between these two types of motives. We suggest a modification of the distinction, between activities that are pursued for consequences that bear an intimate relation to the activities themselves, and those that are purely instrumental. We call the former class of activities “internally motivated,” and argue that while they are not necessarily pleasurable, they yield lasting effects on well-being that instrumental consequences typically do not. Further, we argue that internally motivated activities differ from intrinsically motivated ones, in which the sheer pleasure of the activity motivates its pursuit. We discuss evidence from both laboratory research and field studies, including a longitudinal study of West Point cadets, in support of our arguments.

A reality of conducting motivation research in educational settings is that there are tensions between technical standards of research and practical constraints of a given situation. Although adherence to standards for high-quality measurement is critical for good-quality data to be collected, measurement also requires substantial resources to ensure quality. In the current chapter, we discuss several examples of real data collected in different educational settings using a pragmatic measurement framework. Based on contemporary measurement perspectives, the pragmatic measurement framework emphasizes building evidence-based arguments to support the use and interpretation of a measure. Example 1 explores college students’ attitudes toward general education classes. Example 2 tracks students’ classroom motivation over several time points. Example 3 assesses experimental differences from an online motivation intervention. Together the three examples cover a range of possible research questions that researchers may encounter. As a whole, this chapter demonstrates that important and meaningful insights can be gained using pragmatic approaches to measurement. Importantly, we discuss the trade-offs that researchers or other measure users must consider when adopting a pragmatic approach to measurement.

Developing interest is a powerful support for deeper learning. The presence of even some interest beneficially affects individuals’ attention and memory, as well as their motivation and meaningful engagement. In this chapter, we expand on previous descriptions of the relation between interest and its development as conceptualized in the Four-Phase Model of Interest Development (Hidi & Renninger, 2006; Renninger & Hidi, 2016). We explain that interest has a physiological basis, and therefore is universal – meaning that all persons, regardless of age or context, can be supported to develop at least some interest in topics to be learned. We describe how and when interest is likely to develop. We review findings which provide evidence that the structure of tasks and activities, as well as interactions with other people, may be helpful to interest development, and also that when these supports are mismatched with the learner's phase of interest, they may constrain or impede interest development. We point to interest as a determinant of learners’ understanding, effort, and feedback preferences, and the coordination of their phase of interest development with their abilities to set and realize goals, feel self-efficacy, and self-regulate. We conclude by identifying some open questions concerning the process of interest development and learning.

In this chapter we examine measures and methods that have come to prominence over the last two decades exploring how they build on, and are shaped by, relevant theory. In addition, we identify how contemporary measures and methods have expanded as researchers investigate interactive influences of person and context. First, the importance of distinguishing levels of generality and specificity in definitions of motivation constructs is explored. Second, we examine attempts to define the type of relation between motivation constructs and learning, for example, mediation relations and reciprocal relations. As specific research is considered we direct attention to the types of analytic procedures that have been used to test hypotheses and assess models of the relations between motivation and learning. In particular we highlight the development of research methods that go beyond the range of insights into motivation and learning that can be achieved using only self-report questionnaires.

Curiosity and situational interest are powerful driving forces in learning and motivation that lead students to learn more effectively. In this chapter, we elucidate curiosity and situational interest by focusing on (1) conceptual definitions and characteristics, (2) antecedents, (3) cognitive and behavioral outcomes, and (4) strategies to foster them in school. Curiosity is a short-lasting, aversive state that desires an acquisition of specific information. Its properties contrast with those of situational interest, which is an overall positive affect and a general preference for a topic. Whereas curiosity and situational interest are stimulated by similar contextual features (such as collative variables), triggering curiosity requires one to perceive an information gap between what one knows and what one wants to know. Despite these differences, ample evidence displays that both curiosity and situational interest positively impact students’ learning, motivation, creativity, and well-being once triggered. Thus, in closing, integrative and specific pedagogical guidelines to enhance students’ curiosity and situational interest in education practice are suggested.

In this chapter, we describe psychological and neuroscientific research that demonstrates the unique characteristics of self-related information processing. These characteristics have been shown to produce beneficial effects on basic functions (such as perception, attention, and actions), as well as on higher-order cognitive activities (including memory). The findings are explained by their correspondence to the neurocorrelates of self-related information processing. Northoff's (2016) basic model of the self, which describes self-specificity to be a fundamental aspect of the brain's spontaneous (resting) activity, provides further clarification of these results. After considering the unique characteristics of self-related information processing, we describe the potential benefits of considering findings from neuroscience for educational practice by pointing to the positive outcomes of utility value interventions. More specifically, these types of interventions, which are grounded in the expectancy-value theory of student motivation, are examples of how self-related information processing can have educational benefits by increasing motivation and learning.

In this chapter, we describe the principles of a person-oriented approach to studying individual differences (and similarities), and how it can be applied to the study of students’ achievement goal orientations. First, we briefly illustrate the approach, which provides a way of looking at the relative emphasis of different achievement goal orientations, thereby explicitly addressing the issue of multiple goals and their associations with important outcomes. Second, we give a comprehensive review of studies that have applied such an approach to investigating students’ achievement goals. The diversity in conceptualizations, methods, and study samples in the studies complicates the interpretation of the findings, but some generalizations can nevertheless be made. Based on the review, we conclude that students with qualitatively different achievement goal orientation profiles can clearly be identified, and that the extracted profiles are rather similar across studies. Further, it seems that such profiles are relatively stable over time and meaningfully associated with learning and various educational outcomes (e.g., academic achievement, self-perceptions, well-being, task-related motivation, and performance). The review also contributes to the debate concerning the advantages of endorsing different goals. Finally, we raise some methodological concerns, discuss implications for learning, and provide suggestions for future research.

Curiosity has been a popular subject of inquiry by psychological scientists for over a century. Nevertheless, its nature, dimensionality, and determinants all remain surprisingly poorly understood. While there is general agreement on a “broad strokes” understanding of curiosity as a desire for new knowledge, the precise character of that desire and the specific behaviors it may motivate continue to spark considerable disagreement and debate. In this chapter, I discuss both previous and contemporary theory and research on curiosity as a psychological construct. I describe curiosity in terms of two types: D-type and I-type. D-type curiosity is theorized to reflect an uncomfortable “need to know” that becomes increasingly bothersome until satisfied by obtaining the desired specific pieces of missing information. I-type curiosity is theorized to be a more relaxed “take it or leave it” attitude towards the discovery of new information, in which the aim is simply to have fun while learning. Qualitative differences between I-type and D-type curiosity experiences – being motivated either to induce situational interest or reduce situational uncertainty, respectively – are hypothesized to translate into significant quantifiable differences in the extent to which each type of curiosity energizes behavior. Specifically, D-type curiosity is hypothesized to be associated with both more intense levels of state-curiosity and greater persistence in subsequent information-seeking behavior as compared to I-type curiosity. Finally, future directions for research are discussed.

While research on neuroscience posits that intrinsic and extrinsic incentives involve a single, common psychological process based on a reinforcement learning model (forming a “commonality view” on motivation), research in psychology has made a strong distinction between these two types of incentives (forming a “multifaceted view” on motivation), often even viewing them as competitive. Although they are not necessarily contradictory, I argue that these two meta-theoretical views have biased and prevented our comprehensive understanding of motivation and its relation to learning. I suggest ways that these different perspectives can inform each other, contributing to our broader understanding of human motivation and learning. These examples include the effects of reward on learning, the way people can transform one type of motivation to another, and a rewarding view for effort, challenge, and negative feedback. The arguments presented in this chapter underscore the vital importance of cross-disciplinary work on motivation and learning in future studies.