Hull’s Drive Theory: One of the foundational theories of motivation in the behaviourist learning theory tradition is the drive reduction theory, which was created by Clark Hull in 1943. The drive is characterized as a drive resulting from a physiological or psychological necessity. It functions as an internal stimulant that encourages someone to satisfy their drive. Drive theory, another name for his systematic behaviour theory, describes learning as a reinforcement system in which specific behaviours are initially reinforced.
An outcome that meets a need is provided when a behaviour is met with reinforcement. The foundation of drive theory is the idea that, in the absence of these needs, an adverse state of tension results from the psychological demands that organisms have from birth. Drive decreases and the body reverts to a relaxed, homeostasis-like condition when a requirement is met. Example- To alleviate the discomfort that hunger causes our bodies, we eat when we are hungry. This is a noteworthy illustration of the drive reduction theory. We wear sweaters to satisfy our demand for warmth and to regulate our body temperature when we’re cold. This is yet another typical drive reduction theory illustration.
Read More: The Psychology of Behaviour
Motivational Readiness:
An extension of Warden’s drive-incentive relationship proposes that a person’s physiological demands would be matched with a commensurate drive. The resources that are readily available in a person’s surroundings and that they can utilize to reach their intended outcome are known as their affordances. The affordances are situated in an atmosphere that is similar to Lewin’s living quarters. What the user wants determines the affordance and efficacy level. For the wish to be satisfied, the affordance properties must be able to meet the requirements. For instance, if the affordance was a tiny bag of gummy worms, someone whose need was protection from a hailstorm would not be pleased.
Read More: Triarchic theory of intelligence
Furthermore, according to Warden’s drive-incentive link, behaviour increases in tandem with increases in drive or incentive. Hull argues that because drive and motivation are related, when a person has a drive, their level of discomfort rises, which in turn motivates them to eliminate the need that lies at the heart of the drive. Previous attempts to explain how internal and external variables interact to influence motivation and action led to the development of the theory of motivational readiness.
Read More: Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory
This hypothesis is predicated on the idea that people will have desires and act to fulfil those desires (if the desires are indeed attainable). Any physiological or psychological need, such as the desire for food, can be classified as a want. For instance, a person may drive to a restaurant in the hopes that the food there will satisfy their hunger. Exercise, diet, weight control, and smoking-related studies have all highlighted the importance of motivational preparedness.
Read More: The Psychology of Discipline
Drive Reduction Theory
Hull’s theory of motivation has several faults, even though the drive theory was highly popular in the middle of the 20th century, according to detractors. These are a handful:
The main flaw in the drive theory is that it fails to explain why a person acts in a certain way when they don’t have an underlying, unfulfilled need. One could indulge in a three-course meal, for example, even if they’re not hungry. People occasionally engage in risky activities like adventure sports, which serve to increase internal tension rather than to lower it. Hull’s Drive Reduction Theory Doesn’t Provide an Answer for This Dangerous Conduct.
Read More: The Psychology Behind Hard Work
According to psychologists, there are two types of drives: primary and secondary. While secondary drives are acquired by conditioning or association with a primary drive, primary drives are innate biological needs like hunger or thirst. Examples of secondary drives are financial gain and social acceptance. The reason secondary drives serve as reinforcement for a certain behaviour even when they don’t lessen biological needs is not explained by Hull’s drive reduction theory.
Read More: The Psychology Behind Self-Respect
Hull’s theory of motivation has been widely utilized as the foundation for additional study into psychology and human behaviour despite these shortcomings. Over time, other theorists have developed their alternatives to the Clark Hull drive reduction hypothesis. Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is one such example. The drive theory of motivation, sometimes known as the drive hypothesis, holds that people act in particular ways to ease the tension that their unmet biological demands cause inside their bodies. A “drive” is the state of arousal or internal tension that arises in the body as a result of these requirements. According to the drive reduction theory, reducing one’s drive is the main driving force behind all human behaviour.
Hull proposed the drive theory of motivation as a theory to explain learning, motivation, and human behaviour. Understanding yourself, your internal motivations, and your coworkers is crucial in today’s dynamic business environment if you want to thrive as a growth-driven professional and pursue a lifetime learning path. Based on the same idea, the Clark Hull drive reduction theory operates. An individual begins to act in a way that satisfies an unfulfilled need in their body, which lowers their drive and helps them reach a condition of equilibrium. Hull used training and reinforcement to describe human behaviour as a neo-behaviourist. According to the drive reduction theory, the act of reducing drive serves as reinforcement for the conduct that enabled the individual to fulfil their unmet need.
