Science and Psychology

MotivationFinder™ is based on empirically proven psychological theory and was developed using elite psychometric standards

Psychology

MotivationFinder™ is based upon the following psychological theories:

Human Motivation Theory - Also known as needs-theory, this theory of motivation states that individuals possess motives that create needs which determine behavior. Henry Murray first proposed that there are four needs: 1. power, 2. achievement, 3. intimacy, and 4. affiliation. David McClelland focused on motivation in the workplace, and developed Three Needs Theory, which states that people are driven by a need for power, achievement, or affiliation.
Self-Determination Theory - Developed by Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan, Self-Determination Theory ties human motivation, personality, and ideal functioning together. The theory states that there are two powerful types of motivation - intrinsic and extrinsic - that determine how we behave and who we are (Deci & Ryan, 2008). Extrinsic motivation comes from external expectations, rewards, and punishments. Intrinsic motivation comes from within a person, and from their own internal drives, values, and interests.
Action versus State Orientation - The theory of action versus state orientation deals with a person's ability to self-regulate their feelings and emotions while pursuing goals.
Item Response Theory - Also known as IRT, Item Response Theory is a psychometric method for analyzing answers to questionnaire or assessment items/questions in order to improve measurement validity, accuracy, and reliability.

Science

MotivationFinder™ was developed through four stages using the scientifically based and proven method of psychometrics:

Stage One. We developed a large pool of self-assessment questions, drawing from the current scientific findings on personality and motivation, and on the strong counseling and coaching experience of the self-assessment creators.
Stage Two. We submitted these items to several large sample groups among the target population. Using an online survey, we created a large dataset that enabled us to check and validate the psychometric properties of the developed questions.
Stage Three. We analyzed the psychometric data and selected the questions which held the highest psychometric properties. We conducted numerous exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to investigate the validity of the MotivationFinder™ self-assessment. We then checked the selected items for reliability using methods from both classical test theory and item response theory.
Stage Four. We determined the scoring and then established the standards for the test values to interpret the respective extent of an individual test value on the basis of representative random samples.
Stage Five (ongoing). We continually validate, analyze, and refine MotivationFinder™ over time as more and more people take the assessment.

Methodology

The MotivationFinder™ self-assessment includes and combines four different areas related to motivation, personality, and goal achievement:

Motives - these are motives that reside in the conscious mind, shaped by environment, society, external rewards, and self-beliefs.
Desires - these are needs created by motives and manifest as a "desire to move towards" or a "desire to move away" from a specific motive.
Satisfaction Levels based on Foundational Needs - these are the three needs of the Self-Determination Theory that measure what is necessary for intrinsic motivation.
Goal Dynamics - these are measurements of action vs. state orientation in relation to pursuing goals.

Motives, desires, satisfaction levels and goal dynamics are measured by using self-describing statements as used in classical personality questionnaires.

Sources

MotivationFinder™ draws from the following sources:

Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-Determination Theory in Work Organizations: The State of a Science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4(1), 19–43.
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for Constructing Self-Efficacy Scales. Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents, 5(1), 307–337.
Brunstein, J. C. (2001). Persönliche Ziele und Handlungs- versus Lageorientierung. Wer bindet sich an realistische und bedürfniskongruente Ziele? Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 22(1), 1–12.
Diefendorff, J. M., Richard, E. M., & Gosserand, R. H. (2006). Examination of Situational and Attitudinal Moderators of the Hesitation and Performance Relation. Personnel Psychology, 59(2), 365–393.
Edelen, M. O., & Reeve, B. B. (2007). Applying Item Response Theory (IRT) Modeling to Questionnaire Development, Evaluation, and Refinement. Quality of Life Research, 16(S1), 5–18.
Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Mahwah, N.J: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Frey, D. (Hrsg.). (2016). Psychologie der Werte: von Achtsamkeit bis Zivilcourage - Basiswissen aus Psychologie und Philosophie. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.
Guthke, Böttcher, & Sprung. (1990). Psychodiagnostik: ein Lehr- und Arbeitsbuch für Psychologen sowie empirisch arbeitende Humanwissenschaftler. Bd. 1: ...
Guttschick, K. E. (2015). Konstruktion und Validierung eines Leistungsmotivationstests für Online-Self-Assessments.
Heckhausen, J., & Heckhausen, H. (Hrsg.). (2010). Motivation und Handeln. (4., überarb. und erw. Aufl). Berlin: Springer.
Holland, J. L. (1997). Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Vocational Personalities and Work Environments. Psychological Assessment Resources.
Kehr, H. M. (2004). Integrating Implicit Motives, Explicit Motives, and Perceived Abilities: The Compensatory Model of Work Motivation and Volition. Academy of management review, 29(3), 479–499.
Kleinbeck, U. (2006). Handlungsziele. In Motivation und Handeln (S. 255–276). Springer.
Koole, S. L., & Jostmann, N. B. (2004). Getting a Grip on Your Feelings: Effects of Action Orientation and External Demands on Intuitive Affect Regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(6), 974–990.
Kuhl, J. (1981). Motivational and functional helplessness: The Moderating Effect of State Versus Action Orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(1), 155–170.
Kuhl, J. (1994). A Theory of Action and State Orientations. Volition and Personality: Action Versus State Orientation, 9–46.
Kuhl, J. (2000). A Functional-Design Approach to Motivation and Self-Regulation: The Dynamics of Personality Systems and Interactions. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, M. Zeidner, M. (Ed) Boekaerts, P. R. (Ed) Pintrich, & M. (Ed) Zeidner (Hrsg.), Handbook of self-regulation. (S. 111–169). San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press. Abgerufen von
Kuhl, J., & Goschke, T. (1994). A theory of Action Control: Mental Subsystems, Modes of Control, and Volitional Conflict-Resolution Strategies. Volition and Personality: Action Versus State Orientation, 5, 93–124.
Kuhl, J., & Kazén, M. (2003). Handlungs- und Lageorientierung: Wie lernt man seine Gefühle zu steuern? In J. Stiensmeier-Pelster & F. Rheinberg (Hrsg.), Diagnostik von Motivation und Selbstkonzept (S. 201–219). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Kuhl, J., Kazén, M., & Koole, S. L. (2006). Putting Self‐Regulation Theory into Practice: A User’s Manual. Applied psychology, 55(3), 408–418.
Kuhl, J., & Koole, S. L. (2004). Workings of the Will: A Functional Approach. In J. Greenberg, S. L. Koole, T. Pyszczynski, J. (Ed) Greenberg, S. L. (Ed) Koole, & T. (Ed) Pyszczynski (Hrsg.), Handbook of Experimental Existential Psychology. (S. 411–430). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.
O’Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for Determining the Number of Components Using Parallel Analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32(3), 396–402.
Reise, S. P., & Revicki, D. A. (Hrsg.). (2015). Handbook of Item Response Theory Modeling: Applications to Typical Performance Assessment. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Rost, J. (2004). Lehrbuch Testtheorie-Testkonstruktion (2., vollständig überarbeitete und erweiterte Aufl.).
Schmalt, H.-D., & Sokolowski, K. (2000). Zum gegenwärtigen Stand der Motivdiagnostik. Diagnostica, 46(3), 115–123.
Skinner, B. F. (1966). What is the Experimental Analysis of Behavior?. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9(3), 213–218.
Stadelmaier, U. W. (2010). Vom Stolpern und Scheitern auf Arbeit: Berufsbezogene Handlungs- vs. Lageorientierung als persönlichkeitsbedingter Prädiktor beruflicher Arbeitsleistung. In T. Rigotti, S. Korek, & K. Otto (Hrsg.), Gesund mit und ohne Arbeit (S. 315–326). Lengerich: Pabst.
Stadelmaier, U. W. (2016). Berufsbezogene Handlungs- vs. Lageorientierung: Skalierbarkeit und Beziehung zu beruflicher Arbeitsleistung. Leipzig.

Get started with MotivationFinder™ today by discovering your #1 self-motivator and #1 deepest desire for free

Take the Free Assessment Now

Have an unlock code or ready to purchase? Click here

Science and Psychology

Psychology

Science

Methodology

Sources

Resources

About

Products

Site