Tuesday, 5 October 2010


This is the video on motivation we have seen in class. You'll find questions about it and important vocabulary you should look at before watching in the first comment.

1 comment:

  1. 1) BEFORE LISTENING. Take a look (and try to memorise) the following vocabulary used in the video.

    Defy – (here) elude, especially in a baffling way; "This behavior defies explanation"
    Mainstream – (here adjective although it can also be a noun) Representing the prevalent attitudes, values, and practices of a society or group
    To replicate a study – To reproduce or repeat (in science, usually to demonstrate the validity of a previous experiment).
    Run foul of - to act in a way not allowed by rules or the law.
    Compliance – (here) A disposition or tendency to yield to the will of others. The act of complying with a rule or request.
    Engagement – (here) the act of being occupied or dedicated fully to something.
    A whole array of – a whole set/group of
    Mastery – command of/proficiency in.
    Discretionary time – spare time you can use at your own discretion.
    To moore – To make fast (a vessel, for example) by means of cables, anchors, or lines: moor a ship to a dock; a dirigible moored to a tower.
    Unmoore – To detatch cables, anchors or lines.
    Paramount - fundamental
    Crappy – very low quality
    Lame – lacking in strength or a limb of the body. Crippled.


    1) Why is the science of motivation freaky?

    a) Because it seems to run counter to previous intuitions on human nature.
    b) Because it shows how manipulable we are.
    c) Because scientific findings are inconsistent.

    2) What 2 common preconceptions do the two studies on motivation mentioned in the video refute?

    a) The commonly assumed value of salaries and wages.
    b) The thought that humans are predictable and psychologically conditionable.
    c) The commonly assumed resuts of reward and punishment.

    3) When do money rewards increase performance according to MIT researchers?

    a) When the subjects of study have a very high I.Q.
    b) When it is a case of repetitive, physical tasks.
    c) When average performers (people who do neither too well or too badly) perceive they are better treated.

    4)What happened, surprisingly, when higher cognitive skills came into the equation?

    a) Higher rewards led to poorer results.
    b) Higher rewards led to higher stress.
    c) The subjects of study performed much better than expected.

    5)What discards the impression that there is a left-wing conspiracy behind these findings?

    d) The fact that they don’t reflect Lenin’s ideas.
    e) They are supported by the Republican Party.
    f) The research is funded by a very mainstream financial institution.

    6)Why did they go and test their findings somewhere else?
    a) Because the amounts they used as reward were low in comparative terms.
    b) Because they thought the results had to be wrong.
    c) Because that’s what all scientists must do to validate their results.

    7)What happened then?

    a) The results were identical to the ones they got in America.
    b) The results were even more revealing and demonstrated that monetary rewords don’t work as usually expected.
    c) The results somewhat contradicted the original ones.

    8)What is the best use of money as a motivator?

    a) Paying employees enough so that they can focus on their work.
    b) Paying employees more than average.
    c) Paying employees in accordance with their performance.

    9)What three factors lead to better performance?


    10)What happens if we detatch the profit motive from the purpose motive?

    a) Companies become richer.
    b) You get poor service and low quality products.
    c) Employees try to find a purpose.