From: grimlok@hubcap.clemson.edu (Mike Percy)
Subject: NEA discussion (Nea a need *n*)
Organization: Clemson University
Distribution: alt
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 13:46:38 GMT


[rwd4f@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU (Rob Dobson) questioned a statement I made
and asked for supporting evidence]

[The following is long and has virtually no bearing on censorship, 
but this is where I got into this, so I'll keep it here.  I won't
however, be continuing it here; any further discussion of this on my
part will be via email.  I hope we can make a small effort to keep 
censorship issues on alt.censorship.]

Regarding the "many studies" vis extrinsic and intrinsic motivations.  
Supporting evidence was requested, so here it is.  From "In Pursuit 
of Happiness and Good Government" by Charles Murray [Simon & Schuster 
1988].  Intrinsic motivation was defined here to be "the inate, 
natural propensity to engage one's interests and exercise one's 
capacities..."  These scholars have not been particularly interested 
in why things are enjoyable.  They are satisfied to take as given 
that certain activities are self-sustaining, done "for the fun of 
it," and have tried to determine how this type of intrinsic 
motivation interacts with extrinsic motivation.

They found a tension between the two in that paying people changes 
how they approach the activities.  It makes leads people to treat an 
activity as something they have to do rather than something they want 
to do.

Edward Deci gave students block puzzles to solve.  The ones who were 
payed worked on easier puzzles and quit when the time was up.  The 
ones who were not payed  continued to work on the puzzles after time 
was up, and they often worked on more difficult puzzels to start 
with. Calder and Staw found that those who were payed to assemble 
jigsaw puzzles found it less enjoyable than those who weren't.  
Prichard, Campbell and Campbell found the same effect among students 
asked to solve chess problems.  Other researchers found the same 
effect for high-school students.  Preschoolers.  The mentally 
retarded.    Yoshimura demonstraded the effect among Japanese and 
Eden demonstrated it among Isrealis.  By the end of the 1970s, there 
was no longer any question whether extrinsinc rewards tenedn to 
undermine intrinsic motivation.

The Aristotelian Principle: Payment tends to give people an incentive 
to strip their jobs of the complexity and challange that create 
enjoyment in the first place.  People who do something they have to 
do to gain some other end, then they tend to make that task as simple 
as possible, and want to complete it as quickly as possible.  Also, 
once a person becomes used to the idea that the job had to get done 
as quickly and painlessly as possible to get the extrinsic reward, 
that attitude carried over even when that reward was removed.  
Children who learned a game with a reward, played the game less often 
and a simpler version than those children who had learned it in a no-
reward situation.

A bibliography will follow, but I think I've sufficiently made my 
point:  artists who want to create art would create it for their own 
pleasure.  When the NEA attempts to assist them by facilitiating 
their work, they may become more focused on getting the money than 
creating the art.  If this is true, the NEA is ending up with poorer 
art than might have been produced if no money had been involved!  Why 
then, do we fund this?

You mentioned obscure works that might not have been seen without NEA 
funding.  Aren't there likely many, many more that are similarly 
obscured?  Why not fund them all?  And you argue that art and 
creativity is so beneficial for society.  I feel that some of my 
computer programs are works of art (of course, I'm biased!).  The NEA 
doesn't seem ready to fund me.  Why are only artists' jobs funded in 
this manner?

While I'll certainly grant that the NEA can produce benefits, I 
contend that much of the art funded would still be created for its 
own sake by artists seeking intrinsic rewards.  Adding the extrinsic 
rewards of NEA funding may be detrimental to the produced art.  And 
finally, that private funding would fill the gap nicely, it is after 
all a measly 68-70 cents per taxpayer, right?  If I like art and 
donate $10, I let more than ten art-ignorant people off the hook!  
And better yet, I fund the art I like best, most.
------------
Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan, "Intrinsic Motivation and Self-
Determination in Human Behavior:

B. J. Calder and B.M. Staw, "Self-Perception of Intrinsic and 
Extrinsic Motivation", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

R.D. Pritchard, K.M. Campbell, D.J. Campbell, "Effects of Extrinsic 
Financial Rewards on Intrinsic Motivation", Journal of Applied 
Psychology

J. Harackiewicz, "The Effects of Reward Contingency and Performance 
Feedback on Intrinsic Motivation", Journal of Personality and Social 
Psychology

D. Green, B. Sternberg, and M.R. Lepper, "Overjustification in a 
Token Economy", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

R. Anderson, S. T. Manoogian, and J.S. Reznick, "The Undermining and 
Enhancing of Intrinsic Motivation in Preschool Children", Journal of 
Personality and Social Psychology

T.S. Pittman, J. Emery, and A.K. Boggiano, "Intrinsic and Extrinsic 
Motivational Orientations: Reward-Induced Changes in Preference for 
COmplexity", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

[plenty more listed, but I didn't feel like typing them all in]

Mike Percy             | grimlok@hubcap.clemson.edu  | I don't know about
Sr. Systems Analyst    | mspercy@clemson.clemson.edu | your brain, but mine
Info. Sys. Development | mspercy@clemson.BITNET      | is really...bossy.
Clemson University     | (803) 656-3780              | (Laurie Anderson)


Organization: Art, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA