Abstract

In the last decade, girls have attained similar achievement levels in mathematics and natural sciences as boys. Girls also value mathematics or sciences as highly as boys do. However, women are still not attaining equivalent career success in professional fields associated with mathematics and natural sciences, such as engineering and computer science. One possible explanation for the disassociation between school-based motivation and achievement in mathematics and sciences, on the one hand, and successful entry and pursuit of science-related careers, on the other hand, might be that the two achievement contexts – school and work/career – require different motivational self-regulatory skills to be most effective. The chapter discusses a set of individual differences in various components of motivational self-regulation, ranging from opportunity-congruent goal selection to implicit and explicit motives, volitional commitment, and goal disengagement and self-protection. To date, we have only scarce empirical evidence about gender differences in these components of motivational self-regulation. However, the stark contrasts between the self-regulatory requirements in the highly structured school versus the low structured work domain present a fascinating research area to begin to explain the gender gap between the two domains of achievement behavior.

This is the new edition of Motivation and Action. The first English edition, based on the second German edition and published by Springer-Verlag in 1991, was written by Heinz Heckhausen, who died on October 30, 1988. Springer-Verlag and I agreed that a revised edition of this influential textbook on motivational psychology was needed, and Cambridge University Press was ready to publish the international edition of the new book. The edition written by Heinz Heckhausen was already over 15 years old, and it was clear that considerable revisions would be required. Enormous progress has since been made in motivation psychology and its subdomains. There have been major conceptual and empirical innovations, informed and inspired in part by the research perspectives highlighted by Heinz Heckhausen (especially in Chapter 6, “Achievement Motivation,” and Chapter 15, “Motivation and Development”), as well as by the study of implicit versus explicit motives, and by the lifespan theory of control. It would be a Herculean task to provide a comprehensive overview of all these developments and to survey the field of motivation psychology in its full range and complexity. No single scientist could now hope to follow in Heinz Heckhausen's footsteps and accomplish this task alone. A collaborative approach was clearly called for, and a look at the ranks of Heinz Heckhausen's students and their students shows that almost every subdomain of motivation psychology is represented by one or several renowned researchers.

A control theory approach

In this chapter a control-theoretical approach to developmental regulation in adulthood is proposed (Heckhausen, 1999). The first section addresses the fundamental challenges posed for the individual's developmental regulation across the life-span, as they result from the general shift in the developmental ecology towards greater risks for decline and fewer chances for growth at increasing age levels during adulthood. In this section, I also discuss a repertoire of control strategies based on the life-span theory of control (Heckhausen and Schulz, 1995; Schulz and Heckhausen, 1996) and their orchestration by the individual's attempts to optimize development in terms of maximizing age appropriateness, manage inter-domain trade-offs, and maintain diversity. After this wide-angle view of life-span development and its regulation, the chapter's perspective zooms to the pursuit of major developmental goals. For each developmental goal there is an age-based trajectory of opportunities and constraints, which reflects first increasing, then peaking, and finally decreasing potential to realize the respective developmental goal (Heckhausen, 2000a). Based on this analysis, an action-theoretical model of developmental regulation around developmental deadlines is introduced. Exemplar empirical evidence for age-graded action cycles of engagement and disengagement with developmental goals in the domain of childbearing and of partnership is discussed.

Fundamental challenges for developmental regulation

The life-span theory of control, developed by Heckhausen and Schulz (1995; Schulz and Heckhausen, 1996) focuses on the individual as the agent in development (see also Lerner and Busch-Rossnagel, 1981; Brandtstädter, 1998).

This chapter introduces the concept of developmental goals. Developmental goals are conceptualized as organizers of developmental regulation. An action-theoretical framework based on recent innovations in motivational action theory (H. Heckhausen 1987a, 1987b, 1987c, 1989; H. Heckhausen & Kuhl 1985) is utilized. Although motivational action theory provides the general theoretical framework for our research, action directed at development constitutes a particular case. Development-related action is embedded in and shaped by its action field, the human life course, which entails particular types of constraints. These biological, sociostructural, and age-normative constraints to life-span development were discussed in Chapter 2. This chapter examines a specific type of age-graded constraint: age-normative deadlines for the attainment of developmental goals.

I shall start with a comparison between the concept of “developmental goals” and other related concepts and, subsequently, introduce an action-phase model developed for general motivated behavior. This model will then be extended to include the concept of action deadlines and be applied to behavior directed at developmental goals.

Developmental Goals and Related Concepts

Although the early phase of revival of the life-span approach was in general characterized by a greater emphasis on explanatory or boundary factors for individual development, there were also early pioneers of the study of life-span changes in individuals' motivation and attempts to take an active part in their developmental course.

Now that the fundamental requirements for developmental regulation and the biological sociostructural and age-normative constraints have been outlined in the previous chapter, this chapter will address the means of control available to the individual to meet the demands of developmental regulation. The basic functional characteristics of control-related behavior and its change across the human life span are conceptualized in the life-span theory of control (J. Heckhausen & Schulz 1995). First, conceptually important dimensions for distinguishing various kinds of control-related behavior are discussed. Subsequently, relevant findings from diverse areas of research pertaining to all age groups from infancy to old age are considered and integrated into the new theoretical framework.

Humans strive to produce behavior-event contingencies and thereby to exert control over the environment. This fundamental motivator of behavior is shared with many other species, at least with all mammals. Numerous studies on both humans and nonhuman mammals have shown that behavior-event contingencies bear reinforcing potential in their own right, irrespective of consummatory behavior (White 1959). Thus, for instance, children as well as rats prefer rewards that are contingent on their own behavior over rewards that are noncontingent on their own behavior (Singh 1970).

A deeply rooted desire for behavior-event contingencies is adaptive, because it provides a generalized motivator for adaptive action that reaches in scope far beyond a restricted set of drive-related goals.

This final chapter will briefly review the conclusions that can be drawn from the theory and empirical research presented in the previous chapters. Because of the nature of this research program, the theory is much larger in scope than the empirical studies reported. Therefore, the tasks and questions set for empirical research, which follow from the lifespan theory of control and its model of developmental regulation, are extensive. Some selected prospects for future research in each of the areas covered will be developed in the following section. Because of the wide scope of phenomena involved in developmental regulation across the life course, the discussion of research prospects needs to be selective and focused on areas of particular intellectual promise.

The great variability and relative dearth of biologically based determination in human behavior pose two basic challenges to human behavioral regulation: the management of selectivity and failure compensation (J. Heckhausen & Schulz 1995). The individual needs to choose certain action goals out of many alternatives and then focus the investment of resources for primary control on the goal selected. Moreover, the individual has to compensate for the frustration and threat to self-esteem that may result from regular failure experiences. In the context of ontogenetic change across the life course, both selectivity and failure compensation become even more pressing and more essential.

This chapter addresses the basic question of why regulation of behavior and development is needed. What are the fundamental challenges or problems that require regulatory processes? What obstacles does the individual have to overcome in order to organize his or her behavior? These questions lead to two key requirements of regulation, the management of selectivity and of compensation for failure or loss. Further chapters will consider the means by which the individual contributes to fulfilling these requirements (Chapter 3), especially in terms of regulating life-span development (Chapters 4 through 8) and the biological and societal mechanisms (Chapter 2) that constrain, support, and scaffold developmental regulation. In this first chapter, selectivity and failure/loss compensation are discussed as fundamental characteristics of any human behavior and of developmental regulation in particular (P. Baltes 1987; P. Baltes & M. Baltes 1990; J. Heckhausen & Schulz 1993a, 1995; Marsiske et al. 1995). Selectivity refers to the selection of goals and the focused investment of resources into goal attainment. An example is the selection of a field of study by a student and the subsequent investment of time, effort, and interest in this field. Compensation of failure and loss refers to efforts of an individual to make amends for the negative consequences of failing to attain a selected goal and of other circumstantial losses (e.g., losing a spouse).