In this article, we will discuss the drive-reduction theory and motivation. Our goal is to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of how drive-reduction theory explains motivation.
According to drive-reduction theory, people are driven to satisfy physiological needs to sustain homeostasis.
Motivation is the wants or needs that drive behavior toward the goal. Motivation is divided into two kinds:
- Drives – are acts of urges like hunger or thirst that essentially for biological purposes.
- Motives – are driven nearly by social and psychological mechanisms.
Drives and Homeostasis
An early theory of motivation recommended that the support of homeostasis is especially significant in coordinating behavior. Homeostasis is the inclination to keep an equilibrium, or ideal level, inside an organic framework. In a body framework, a control place that is part of the brain contributes to receptors, regularly piles of neurons. The control center coordinates effectors, which might be different neurons, to address any awkwardness in the body identified by the control place.
The motivation behind natural drives is to address aggravations of homeostasis. Unsatisfied drives are recognized by neurons gathered in the nerve center in the cerebrum. These neurons at that point produce an incorporated reaction to take the drive back to its ideal level. For example, when you are dried out, cold, or exhausted, suitable natural reactions are consequently actuated. While your body accordingly reacts to these survival drives, you likewise become roused to address these aggravations by eating, drinking water, resting, or effectively looking for or creating warmth by moving. Generally, you are propelled to take part in whatever conduct is vital to satisfy an unsatisfied drive. One way that the body evokes this behavioral motivation is by expanding physiological arousal.
What Is Drive-Reduction Theory?
Drive-reduction theory was introduced by Clark Hull in 1943. According to the theory, differences from homeostasis produce physiological needs. These needs appear in psychological drive states that immediate behavior to meet the need and cause the system back to homeostasis. When there is unsatisfaction in the physiological need, a negative state of stress is formed; when the need is satisfied, the drive to fulfill that need is lessened, and the organism reverts to homeostasis. Like this, a drive can be considered an instinctual need that can motivate behavior.
For instance, if it’s been some time since you ate, your blood sugar levels will dip under the ordinary. Low blood sugar initiates a physiological need and a relating drive state (i.e., hunger) that will guide you to search out and devour food. Eating will dispose of the appetite, and, eventually, your blood sugar levels will get back to business as usual.
Drive-reduction theory also accentuates the work that propensities play in the kind of conduct reaction we lock-in. A habit is an example of conduct wherein we routinely draw in; whenever we have occupied with behavior that effectively diminishes a drive, we are bound to participate in that behavior at whatever point confronted with that drive later on.
Primary and Secondary Drive State
Drive-reduction theory recognizes Primary and Secondary drives. First, Primary drives are innate biological needs (e.g., thirst, hunger, and want for sex) that are usually important for survival. Secondary drives, then again, are generally not fundamental for endurance and are frequently connected to social or personality factors (e.g., the craving for riches). Secondary drives are related to Primary drives because the fulfillment of optional drives by implication fulfills Primary drives. For instance, the craving for abundance isn’t required for endurance; nonetheless, abundance furnishes you with cash that you can utilize to obtain food, cover, and other essential needs, consequently by implication fulfilling these Primary drives. Secondary drives become related to Primary drives through classical conditioning.
Drive-Reduction Theory and Learning
According to Hull, drive reduction is a major aspect of learning. Drives are thought to underlie all behavior in that behaviors are only conditioned, or learned if the reinforcement satisfies a drive. Individuals faced with more than one need at the same time experience multiple drives, and research has shown that multiple drives can lead to more rapid learning than a single drive.
Reviews of Drive-Reduction Theory
There are a few issues that leave the legitimacy of drive-reduction theory open for debate. Drive-reduction theory experiences difficulty clarifying why people and different creatures deliberately increment pressure by investigating their surroundings, in any event, when they are not ravenous or parched. There are other entanglements to drive-reduction theory about alleged “pleasure-seeking” behaviors, which appear to conflict with the hypothesis’ statutes. For what reason would an individual effectively search out more incitement if it is now in a condition of unwinding and satisfaction? Defenders of drive-reduction theory would contend that one is never in a condition of complete satisfaction, and in this way, there are consistent drives that should be fulfilled.
Understanding Drive Reduction Theory by Clark Hull
Hull believed that the human body constantly attempts to keep a condition of equilibrium, known as homeostasis. Also, the behavior was a fundamental factor for a creature to keep up this condition of balance.
This thought later drove him to propose the Drive Reduction Theory. He recommended that all motivation emerges because of the need to satisfy certain things. This is additionally known as the theory of motivation. The term drive alludes to
The state of tension or excitement brought about by organic or physiological necessities.
For instance: hunger, thirst, and sex are instances of essential drives, something that is very crucial.
Moreover, drives learned by conditioning are secondary drives.
Drives aren’t really in a single pattern. When a life form is excited with various needs without a moment’s delay, the condition is called multiple drives.
“Generalized conditioned reinforce has greater learned reward value than a simple conditioned reinforce.”
In straightforward terms, multiple drives are trailed by speedier learning than a singular drive.
Hull believed that each human behavior could be clarified by conditioning and reinforcement. Decrease of the drive causes fulfillment, which goes about as a reinforcement for that behavior. Hence, the behavior is well on the way to be rehashed when the reinforcement develops, which means a similar need is stirred later on.
Hull clarified that:
To get by in its current circumstance, an organic entity should carry on in ways that meet these survival needs. When endurance is in danger, the life form is in a condition of need (when the natural necessities for strength are not being met), so the organic entity acts in style to decrease that need.
This is only the clarification of the S-R (Stimulus-Response) relationship. When the reaction brought about by the stimulus prompts fulfillment or reduction of a specific need, the odds of a similar stimulus evoking a similar response are high.
Encouraging feedback includes a stimulus change comprising the introduction or amplification of an appetitive stimulus following a reaction. From this viewpoint, inspiration is intervened by natural occasions, and the idea of recognizing internal and external influences is unnecessary.