Original article by Maslow (was: psychological impact of capitalism)

[fat cat <chillout@xxxxxxxx>]

A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
1
A Theory of Human Motivation
By A. H. Maslow
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
2
Classics in the History of Psychology
An internet resource developed by
Christopher D. Green (http://www.yorku.ca/dept/psych/classics/author.htm)
York University, Toronto, Ontario
ISSN 1492-3713
A Theory of Human Motivation
A. H. Maslow (1943)
Originally Published in Psychological Review, 50, 370-396.
Posted August 2000
[p. 370] I. INTRODUCTION
In a previous paper (13) various propositions were presented which would
have to be
included in any theory of human motivation that could lay claim to being
definitive.
These conclusions may be briefly summarized as follows:
1. The integrated wholeness of the organism must be one of the foundation
stones of motivation theory.
2. The hunger drive (or any other physiological drive) was rejected as a
centering point or model for a definitive theory of motivation. Any drive
that is somatically based and localizable was shown to be atypical rather
than typical in human motivation.
3. Such a theory should stress and center itself upon ultimate or basic
goals rather than partial or superficial ones, upon ends rather than means
to these ends. Such a stress would imply a more central place for
unconscious than for conscious motivations.
4. There are usually available various cultural paths to the same goal.
Therefore conscious, specific, local-cultural desires are not as fundamental
in motivation theory as the more basic, unconscious goals.
5. Any motivated behavior, either preparatory or consummatory, must be
understood to be a channel through which many basic needs may be
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
3
simultaneously expressed or satisfied. Typically an act has more than one
motivation.
6. Practically all organismic states are to be understood as motivated and
as motivating.
7. Human needs arrange themselves in hierarchies of pre-potency. That is
to say, the appearance of one need usually rests on the prior
satisfaction of
another, more pre-potent need. Man is a perpetually wanting animal. Also
no need or drive can be treated as if it were isolated or discrete; every
drive is related to the state of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of
other drives.
8. Lists of drives will get us nowhere for various theoretical and practical
reasons. Furthermore any classification of motivations [p. 371] must deal
with the problem of levels of specificity or generalization the motives to
be classified.
9. Classifications of motivations must be based upon goals rather than
upon instigating drives or motivated behavior.
10. Motivation theory should be human-centered rather than animalcentered.
11. The situation or the field in which the organism reacts must be taken
into account but the field alone can rarely serve as an exclusive
explanation for behavior. Furthermore the field itself must be interpreted
in terms of the organism. Field theory cannot be a substitute for
motivation theory.
12. Not only the integration of the organism must be taken into account,
but also the possibility of isolated, specific, partial or segmental
reactions.
It has since become necessary to add to these another affirmation.
13. Motivation theory is not synonymous with behavior theory. The
motivations are only one class of determinants of behavior. While
behavior is almost always motivated, it is also almost always biologically,
culturally and situationally determined as well.
The present paper is an attempt to formulate a positive theory of
motivation which will
satisfy these theoretical demands and at the same time conform to the
known facts,
clinical and observational as well as experimental. It derives most
directly, however,
from clinical experience. This theory is, I think, in the functionalist
tradition of James and
Dewey, and is fused with the holism of Wertheimer (19), Goldstein (6),
and Gestalt
Psychology, and with the dynamicism of Freud (4) and Adler (1). This
fusion or synthesis
may arbitrarily be called a 'general-dynamic' theory.
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
4
It is far easier to perceive and to criticize the aspects in motivation
theory than to remedy
them. Mostly this is because of the very serious lack of sound data in
this area. I conceive
this lack of sound facts to be due primarily to the absence of a valid
theory of motivation.
The present theory then must be considered to be a suggested program or
framework for
future research and must stand or fall, not so much on facts available
or evidence
presented, as upon researches to be done, researches suggested perhaps,
by the questions
raised in this paper.[p. 372]
II. THE BASIC NEEDS
The 'physiological' needs. -- The needs that are usually taken as the
starting point for
motivation theory are the so-called physiological drives. Two recent
lines of research
make it necessary to revise our customary notions about these needs,
first, the
development of the concept of homeostasis, and second, the finding that
appetites
(preferential choices among foods) are a fairly efficient indication of
actual needs or
lacks in the body.
Homeostasis refers to the body's automatic efforts to maintain a
constant, normal state of
the blood stream. Cannon (2) has described this process for (1) the
water content of the
blood, (2) salt content, (3) sugar content, (4) protein content, (5) fat
content, (6) calcium
content, (7) oxygen content, (8) constant hydrogen-ion level (acid-base
balance) and (9)
constant temperature of the blood. Obviously this list can be extended
to include other
minerals, the hormones, vitamins, etc.
Young in a recent article (21) has summarized the work on appetite in
its relation to body
needs. If the body lacks some chemical, the individual will tend to
develop a specific
appetite or partial hunger for that food element.
Thus it seems impossible as well as useless to make any list of
fundamental physiological
needs for they can come to almost any number one might wish, depending
on the degree
of specificity of description. We can not identify all physiological
needs as homeostatic.
That sexual desire, sleepiness, sheer activity and maternal behavior in
animals, are
homeostatic, has not yet been demonstrated. Furthermore, this list would
not include the
various sensory pleasures (tastes, smells, tickling, stroking) which are
probably
physiological and which may become the goals of motivated behavior.
In a previous paper (13) it has been pointed out that these
physiological drives or needs
are to be considered unusual rather than typical because they are
isolable, and because
they are localizable somatically. That is to say, they are relatively
independent of each
other, of other motivations [p. 373] and of the organism as a whole, and
secondly, in
many cases, it is possible to demonstrate a localized, underlying
somatic base for the
drive. This is true less generally than has been thought (exceptions are
fatigue, sleepiness,
maternal responses) but it is still true in the classic instances of
hunger, sex, and thirst.
It should be pointed out again that any of the physiological needs and
the consummatory
behavior involved with them serve as channels for all sorts of other
needs as well. That is
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
5
to say, the person who thinks he is hungry may actually be seeking more
for comfort, or
dependence, than for vitamins or proteins. Conversely, it is possible to
satisfy the hunger
need in part by other activities such as drinking water or smoking
cigarettes. In other
words, relatively isolable as these physiological needs are, they are
not completely so.
Undoubtedly these physiological needs are the most pre-potent of all
needs. What this
means specifically is, that in the human being who is missing everything
in life in an
extreme fashion, it is most likely that the major motivation would be
the physiological
needs rather than any others. A person who is lacking food, safety,
love, and esteem
would most probably hunger for food more strongly than for anything else.
If all the needs are unsatisfied, and the organism is then dominated by
the physiological
needs, all other needs may become simply non-existent or be pushed into
the background.
It is then fair to characterize the whole organism by saying simply that
it is hungry, for
consciousness is almost completely preempted by hunger. All capacities
are put into the
service of hunger-satisfaction, and the organization of these capacities
is almost entirely
determined by the one purpose of satisfying hunger. The receptors and
effectors, the
intelligence, memory, habits, all may now be defined simply as
hunger-gratifying tools.
Capacities that are not useful for this purpose lie dormant, or are
pushed into the
background. The urge to write poetry, the desire to acquire an
automobile, the interest in
American history, the desire for a new pair of shoes are, in the extreme
case, forgotten or
become of sec-[p.374]ondary importance. For the man who is extremely and
dangerously
hungry, no other interests exist but food. He dreams food, he remembers
food, he thinks
about food, he emotes only about food, he perceives only food and he
wants only food.
The more subtle determinants that ordinarily fuse with the physiological
drives in
organizing even feeding, drinking or sexual behavior, may now be so
completely
overwhelmed as to allow us to speak at this time (but only at this time)
of pure hunger
drive and behavior, with the one unqualified aim of relief.
Another peculiar characteristic of the human organism when it is
dominated by a certain
need is that the whole philosophy of the future tends also to change.
For our chronically
and extremely hungry man, Utopia can be defined very simply as a place
where there is
plenty of food. He tends to think that, if only he is guaranteed food
for the rest of his life,
he will be perfectly happy and will never want anything more. Life
itself tends to be
defined in terms of eating. Anything else will be defined as
unimportant. Freedom, love,
community feeling, respect, philosophy, may all be waved aside as
fripperies which are
useless since they fail to fill the stomach. Such a man may fairly be
said to live by bread
alone.
It cannot possibly be denied that such things are true but their
generality can be denied.
Emergency conditions are, almost by definition, rare in the normally
functioning peaceful
society. That this truism can be forgotten is due mainly to two reasons.
First, rats have
few motivations other than physiological ones, and since so much of the
research upon
motivation has been made with these animals, it is easy to carry the
rat-picture over to the
human being. Secondly, it is too often not realized that culture itself
is an adaptive tool,
one of whose main functions is to make the physiological emergencies
come less and less
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
6
often. In most of the known societies, chronic extreme hunger of the
emergency type is
rare, rather than common. In any case, this is still true in the United
States. The average
American citizen is experiencing appetite rather than hunger when he
says "I am [p. 375]
hungry." He is apt to experience sheer life-and-death hunger only by
accident and then
only a few times through his entire life.
Obviously a good way to obscure the 'higher' motivations, and to get a
lopsided view of
human capacities and human nature, is to make the organism extremely and
chronically
hungry or thirsty. Anyone who attempts to make an emergency picture into
a typical one,
and who will measure all of man's goals and desires by his behavior
during extreme
physiological deprivation is certainly being blind to many things. It is
quite true that man
lives by bread alone -- when there is no bread. But what happens to
man's desires when
there is plenty of bread and when his belly is chronically filled?
At once other (and 'higher') needs emerge and these, rather than
physiological hungers,
dominate the organism. And when these in turn are satisfied, again new
(and still 'higher')
needs emerge and so on. This is what we mean by saying that the basic
human needs are
organized into a hierarchy of relative prepotency.
One main implication of this phrasing is that gratification becomes as
important a
concept as deprivation in motivation theory, for it releases the
organism from the
domination of a relatively more physiological need, permitting thereby
the emergence of
other more social goals. The physiological needs, along with their
partial goals, when
chronically gratified cease to exist as active determinants or
organizers of behavior. They
now exist only in a potential fashion in the sense that they may emerge
again to dominate
the organism if they are thwarted. But a want that is satisfied is no
longer a want. The
organism is dominated and its behavior organized only by unsatisfied
needs. If hunger is
satisfied, it becomes unimportant in the current dynamics of the individual.
This statement is somewhat qualified by a hypothesis to be discussed
more fully later,
namely that it is precisely those individuals in whom a certain need has
always been
satisfied who are best equipped to tolerate deprivation of that need in
the future, and that
furthermore, those who have been de-[p. 376]prived in the past will
react differently to
current satisfactions than the one who has never been deprived.
The safety needs. -- If the physiological needs are relatively well
gratified, there then
emerges a new set of needs, which we may categorize roughly as the
safety needs. All
that has been said of the physiological needs is equally true, although
in lesser degree, of
these desires. The organism may equally well be wholly dominated by
them. They may
serve as the almost exclusive organizers of behavior, recruiting all the
capacities of the
organism in their service, and we may then fairly describe the whole
organism as a
safety-seeking mechanism. Again we may say of the receptors, the
effectors, of the
intellect and the other capacities that they are primarily
safety-seeking tools. Again, as in
the hungry man, we find that the dominating goal is a strong determinant
not only of his
current world-outlook and philosophy but also of his philosophy of the
future. Practically
everything looks less important than safety, (even sometimes the
physiological needs
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
7
which being satisfied, are now underestimated). A man, in this state, if
it is extreme
enough and chronic enough, may be characterized as living almost for
safety alone.
Although in this paper we are interested primarily in the needs of the
adult, we can
approach an understanding of his safety needs perhaps more efficiently
by observation of
infants and children, in whom these needs are much more simple and
obvious. One
reason for the clearer appearance of the threat or danger reaction in
infants, is that they do
not inhibit this reaction at all, whereas adults in our society have
been taught to inhibit it
at all costs. Thus even when adults do feel their safety to be
threatened we may not be
able to see this on the surface. Infants will react in a total fashion
and as if they were
endangered, if they are disturbed or dropped suddenly, startled by loud
noises, flashing
light, or other unusual sensory stimulation, by rough handling, by
general loss of support
in the mother's arms, or by inadequate support.[1][p. 377]
In infants we can also see a much more direct reaction to bodily
illnesses of various
kinds. Sometimes these illnesses seem to be immediately and per se
threatening and seem
to make the child feel unsafe. For instance, vomiting, colic or other
sharp pains seem to
make the child look at the whole world in a different way. At such a
moment of pain, it
may be postulated that, for the child, the appearance of the whole world
suddenly
changes from sunniness to darkness, so to speak, and becomes a place in
which anything
at all might happen, in which previously stable things have suddenly
become unstable.
Thus a child who because of some bad food is taken ill may, for a day or
two, develop
fear, nightmares, and a need for protection and reassurance never seen
in him before his
illness.
Another indication of the child's need for safety is his preference for
some kind of
undisrupted routine or rhythm. He seems to want a predictable, orderly
world. For
instance, injustice, unfairness, or inconsistency in the parents seems
to make a child feel
anxious and unsafe. This attitude may be not so much because of the
injustice per se or
any particular pains involved, but rather because this treatment
threatens to make the
world look unreliable, or unsafe, or unpredictable. Young children seem
to thrive better
under a system which has at least a skeletal outline of rigidity, In
which there is a
schedule of a kind, some sort of routine, something that can be counted
upon, not only for
the present but also far into the future. Perhaps one could express this
more accurately by
saying that the child needs an organized world rather than an
unorganized or unstructured
one.
The central role of the parents and the normal family setup are
indisputable. Quarreling,
physical assault, separation, divorce or death within the family may be
particularly
terrifying. Also parental outbursts of rage or threats of punishment
directed to the child,
calling him names, speaking to him harshly, shaking him, handling him
roughly, or actual
[p. 378] physical punishment sometimes elicit such total panic and
terror in the child that
we must assume more is involved than the physical pain alone. While it
is true that in
some children this terror may represent also a fear of loss of parental
love, it can also
occur in completely rejected children, who seem to cling to the hating
parents more for
sheer safety and protection than because of hope of love.
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
8
Confronting the average child with new, unfamiliar, strange,
unmanageable stimuli or
situations will too frequently elicit the danger or terror reaction, as
for example, getting
lost or even being separated from the parents for a short time, being
confronted with new
faces, new situations or new tasks, the sight of strange, unfamiliar or
uncontrollable
objects, illness or death. Particularly at such times, the child's
frantic clinging to his
parents is eloquent testimony to their role as protectors (quite apart
from their roles as
food-givers and love-givers).
From these and similar observations, we may generalize and say that the
average child in
our society generally prefers a safe, orderly, predictable, organized
world, which he can
count, on, and in which unexpected, unmanageable or other dangerous
things do not
happen, and in which, in any case, he has all-powerful parents who
protect and shield him
from harm.
That these reactions may so easily be observed in children is in a way a
proof of the fact
that children in our society, feel too unsafe (or, in a word, are badly
brought up). Children
who are reared in an unthreatening, loving family do not ordinarily
react as we have
described above (17). In such children the danger reactions are apt to
come mostly to
objects or situations that adults too would consider dangerous.[2]
The healthy, normal, fortunate adult in our culture is largely satisfied
in his safety needs.
The peaceful, smoothly [p. 379] running, 'good' society ordinarily makes
its members feel
safe enough from wild animals, extremes of temperature, criminals,
assault and murder,
tyranny, etc. Therefore, in a very real sense, he no longer has any
safety needs as active
motivators. Just as a sated man no longer feels hungry, a safe man no
longer feels
endangered. If we wish to see these needs directly and clearly we must
turn to neurotic or
near-neurotic individuals, and to the economic and social underdogs. In
between these
extremes, we can perceive the expressions of safety needs only in such
phenomena as, for
instance, the common preference for a job with tenure and protection,
the desire for a
savings account, and for insurance of various kinds (medical, dental,
unemployment,
disability, old age).
Other broader aspects of the attempt to seek safety and stability in the
world are seen in
the very common preference for familiar rather than unfamiliar things,
or for the known
rather than the unknown. The tendency to have some religion or
world-philosophy that
organizes the universe and the men in it into some sort of
satisfactorily coherent,
meaningful whole is also in part motivated by safety-seeking. Here too
we may list
science and philosophy in general as partially motivated by the safety
needs (we shall see
later that there are also other motivations to scientific, philosophical
or religious
endeavor).
Otherwise the need for safety is seen as an active and dominant
mobilizer of the
organism's resources only in emergencies, e. g., war, disease, natural
catastrophes, crime
waves, societal disorganization, neurosis, brain injury, chronically bad
situation.
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
9
Some neurotic adults in our society are, in many ways, like the unsafe
child in their desire
for safety, although in the former it takes on a somewhat special
appearance. Their
reaction is often to unknown, psychological dangers in a world that is
perceived to be
hostile, overwhelming and threatening. Such a person behaves as if a
great catastrophe
were almost always impending, i.e., he is usually responding as if to an
emergency. His
safety needs often find specific [p. 380] expression in a search for a
protector, or a
stronger person on whom he may depend, or perhaps, a Fuehrer.
The neurotic individual may be described in a slightly different way
with some
usefulness as a grown-up person who retains his childish attitudes
toward the world. That
is to say, a neurotic adult may be said to behave 'as if' he were
actually afraid of a
spanking, or of his mother's disapproval, or of being abandoned by his
parents, or having
his food taken away from him. It is as if his childish attitudes of fear
and threat reaction
to a dangerous world had gone underground, and untouched by the growing
up and
learning processes, were now ready to be called out by any stimulus that
would make a
child feel endangered and threatened.[3]
The neurosis in which the search for safety takes its dearest form is in
the compulsiveobsessive
neurosis. Compulsive-obsessives try frantically to order and stabilize
the world
so that no unmanageable, unexpected or unfamiliar dangers will ever
appear (14); They
hedge themselves about with all sorts of ceremonials, rules and formulas
so that every
possible contingency may be provided for and so that no new
contingencies may appear.
They are much like the brain injured cases, described by Goldstein (6),
who manage to
maintain their equilibrium by avoiding everything unfamiliar and strange
and by ordering
their restricted world in such a neat, disciplined, orderly fashion that
everything in the
world can be counted upon. They try to arrange the world so that
anything unexpected
(dangers) cannot possibly occur. If, through no fault of their own,
something unexpected
does occur, they go into a panic reaction as if this unexpected
occurrence constituted a
grave danger. What we can see only as a none-too-strong preference in
the healthy
person, e. g., preference for the familiar, becomes a life-and-death.
necessity in abnormal
cases.
The love needs. -- If both the physiological and the safety needs are
fairly well gratified,
then there will emerge the love and affection and belongingness needs,
and the whole
cycle [p. 381] already described will repeat itself with this new
center. Now the person
will feel keenly, as never before, the absence of friends, or a
sweetheart, or a wife, or
children. He will hunger for affectionate relations with people in
general, namely, for a
place in his group, and he will strive with great intensity to achieve
this goal. He will
want to attain such a place more than anything else in the world and may
even forget that
once, when he was hungry, he sneered at love.
In our society the thwarting of these needs is the most commonly found
core in cases of
maladjustment and more severe psychopathology. Love and affection, as
well as their
possible expression in sexuality, are generally looked upon with
ambivalence and are
customarily hedged about with many restrictions and inhibitions.
Practically all theorists
of psychopathology have stressed thwarting of the love needs as basic in
the picture of
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
10
maladjustment. Many clinical studies have therefore been made of this
need and we know
more about it perhaps than any of the other needs except the
physiological ones (14).
One thing that must be stressed at this point is that love is not
synonymous with sex. Sex
may be studied as a purely physiological need. Ordinarily sexual
behavior is multidetermined,
that is to say, determined not only by sexual but also by other needs, chief
among which are the love and affection needs. Also not to be overlooked
is the fact that
the love needs involve both giving and receiving love.[4]
The esteem needs. -- All people in our society (with a few pathological
exceptions) have a
need or desire for a stable, firmly based, (usually) high evaluation of
themselves, for selfrespect,
or self-esteem, and for the esteem of others. By firmly based
self-esteem, we
mean that which is soundly based upon real capacity, achievement and
respect from
others. These needs may be classified into two subsidiary sets. These
are, first, the desire
for strength, for achievement, for adequacy, for confidence in the face
of the world, and
for independence and freedom.[5] Secondly, we have what [p. 382] we may
call the
desire for reputation or prestige (defining it as respect or esteem from
other people),
recognition, attention, importance or appreciation.[6] These needs have
been relatively
stressed by Alfred Adler and his followers, and have been relatively
neglected by Freud
and the psychoanalysts. More and more today however there is appearing
widespread
appreciation of their central importance.
Satisfaction of the self-esteem need leads to feelings of
self-confidence, worth, strength,
capability and adequacy of being useful and necessary in the world. But
thwarting of
these needs produces feelings of inferiority, of weakness and of
helplessness. These
feelings in turn give rise to either basic discouragement or else
compensatory or neurotic
trends. An appreciation of the necessity of basic self-confidence and an
understanding of
how helpless people are without it, can be easily gained from a study of
severe traumatic
neurosis (8).[7]
The need for self-actualization. -- Even if all these needs are
satisfied, we may still often
(if not always) expect that a new discontent and restlessness will soon
develop, unless the
individual is doing what he is fitted for. A musician must make music,
an artist must
paint, a poet must write, if he is to be ultimately happy. What a man
can be, he must be.
This need we may call self-actualization.
This term, first coined by Kurt Goldstein, is being used in this paper
in a much more
specific and limited fashion. It refers to the desire for
self-fulfillment, namely, to the
tendency for him to become actualized in what he is potentially. This
tendency might be
phrased as the desire to become more and more what one is, to become
everything that
one is capable of becoming.[p. 383]
The specific form that these needs will take will of course vary greatly
from person to
person. In one individual it may take the form of the desire to be an
ideal mother, in
another it may be expressed athletically, and in still another it may be
expressed in
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
11
painting pictures or in inventions. It is not necessarily a creative
urge although in people
who have any capacities for creation it will take this form.
The clear emergence of these needs rests upon prior satisfaction of the
physiological,
safety, love and esteem needs. We shall call people who are satisfied in
these needs,
basically satisfied people, and it is from these that we may expect the
fullest (and
healthiest) creativeness.[8] Since, in our society, basically satisfied
people are the
exception, we do not know much about self-actualization, either
experimentally or
clinically. It remains a challenging problem for research.
The preconditions for the basic need satisfactions. -- There are certain
conditions which
are immediate prerequisites for the basic need satisfactions. Danger to
these is reacted to
almost as if it were a direct danger to the basic needs themselves. Such
conditions as
freedom to speak, freedom to do what one wishes so long as no harm is
done to others,
freedom to express one's self, freedom to investigate and seek for
information, freedom to
defend one's self, justice, fairness, honesty, orderliness in the group
are examples of such
preconditions for basic need satisfactions. Thwarting in these freedoms
will be reacted to
with a threat or emergency response. These conditions are not ends in
themselves but
they are almost so since they are so closely related to the basic needs,
which are
apparently the only ends in themselves. These conditions are defended
because without
them the basic satisfactions are quite impossible, or at least, very
severely endangered.[p.
384]
If we remember that the cognitive capacities (perceptual, intellectual,
learning) are a set
of adjustive tools, which have, among other functions, that of
satisfaction of our basic
needs, then it is clear that any danger to them, any deprivation or
blocking of their free
use, must also be indirectly threatening to the basic needs themselves.
Such a statement is
a partial solution of the general problems of curiosity, the search for
knowledge, truth and
wisdom, and the ever-persistent urge to solve the cosmic mysteries.
We must therefore introduce another hypothesis and speak of degrees of
closeness to the
basic needs, for we have already pointed out that any conscious desires
(partial goals) are
more or less important as they are more or less close to the basic
needs. The same
statement may be made for various behavior acts. An act is
psychologically important if
it contributes directly to satisfaction of basic needs. The less
directly it so contributes, or
the weaker this contribution is, the less important this act must be
conceived to be from
the point of view of dynamic psychology. A similar statement may be made
for the
various defense or coping mechanisms. Some are very directly related to
the protection or
attainment of the basic needs, others are only weakly and distantly
related. Indeed if we
wished, we could speak of more basic and less basic defense mechanisms,
and then
affirm that danger to the more basic defenses is more threatening than
danger to less
basic defenses (always remembering that this is so only because of their
relationship to
the basic needs).
The desires to know and to understand. -- So far, we have mentioned the
cognitive needs
only in passing. Acquiring knowledge and systematizing the universe have
been
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
12
considered as, in part, techniques for the achievement of basic safety
in the world, or, for
the intelligent man, expressions of self-actualization. Also freedom of
inquiry and
expression have been discussed as preconditions of satisfactions of the
basic needs. True
though these formulations may be, they do not constitute definitive
answers to the
question as to the motivation role of curiosity, learning,
philosophizing, experimenting,
etc. They are, at best, no more than partial answers.[p. 385]
This question is especially difficult because we know so little about
the facts. Curiosity,
exploration, desire for the facts, desire to know may certainly be
observed easily enough.
The fact that they often are pursued even at great cost to the
individual's safety is an
earnest of the partial character of our previous discussion. In
addition, the writer must
admit that, though he has sufficient clinical evidence to postulate the
desire to know as a
very strong drive in intelligent people, no data are available for
unintelligent people. It
may then be largely a function of relatively high intelligence. Rather
tentatively, then,
and largely in the hope of stimulating discussion and research, we shall
postulate a basic
desire to know, to be aware of reality, to get the facts, to satisfy
curiosity, or as
Wertheimer phrases it, to see rather than to be blind.
This postulation, however, is not enough. Even after we know, we are
impelled to know
more and more minutely and microscopically on the one hand, and on the
other, more
and more extensively in the direction of a world philosophy, religion,
etc. The facts that
we acquire, if they are isolated or atomistic, inevitably get theorized
about, and either
analyzed or organized or both. This process has been phrased by some as
the search for
'meaning.' We shall then postulate a desire to understand, to
systematize, to organize, to
analyze, to look for relations and meanings.
Once these desires are accepted for discussion, we see that they too
form themselves into
a small hierarchy in which the desire to know is prepotent over the
desire to understand.
All the characteristics of a hierarchy of prepotency that we have
described above, seem to
hold for this one as well.
We must guard ourselves against the too easy tendency to separate these
desires from the
basic needs we have discussed above, i.e., to make a sharp dichotomy
between 'cognitive'
and 'conative' needs. The desire to know and to understand are
themselves conative, i.e.,
have a striving character, and are as much personality needs as the
'basic needs' we have
already discussed (19).[p. 386]
III. FURTHER CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BASIC NEEDS
The degree of fixity of the hierarchy of basic needs. -- We have spoken
so far as if this
hierarchy were a fixed order but actually it is not nearly as rigid as
we may have implied.
It is true that most of the people with whom we have worked have seemed
to have these
basic needs in about the order that has been indicated. However, there
have been a
number of exceptions.
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
13
(1) There are some people in whom, for instance, self-esteem seems to be
more important
than love. This most common reversal in the hierarchy is usually due to
the development
of the notion that the person who is most likely to be loved is a strong
or powerful
person, one who inspires respect or fear, and who is self confident or
aggressive.
Therefore such people who lack love and seek it, may try hard to put on
a front of
aggressive, confident behavior. But essentially they seek high
self-esteem and its
behavior expressions more as a means-to-an-end than for its own sake;
they seek selfassertion
for the sake of love rather than for self-esteem itself.
(2) There are other, apparently innately creative people in whom the
drive to creativeness
seems to be more important than any other counter-determinant. Their
creativeness might
appear not as self-actualization released by basic satisfaction, but in
spite of lack of basic
satisfaction.
(3) In certain people the level of aspiration may be permanently
deadened or lowered.
That is to say, the less pre-potent goals may simply be lost, and may
disappear forever, so
that the person who has experienced life at a very low level, i. e.,
chronic unemployment,
may continue to be satisfied for the rest of his life if only he can get
enough food.
(4) The so-called 'psychopathic personality' is another example of
permanent loss of the
love needs. These are people who, according to the best data available
(9), have been
starved for love in the earliest months of their lives and have simply
lost forever the
desire and the ability to give and to receive affection (as animals lose
sucking or pecking
reflexes that are not exercised soon enough after birth).[p. 387]
(5) Another cause of reversal of the hierarchy is that when a need has
been satisfied for a
long time, this need may be underevaluated. People who have never
experienced chronic
hunger are apt to underestimate its effects and to look upon food as a
rather unimportant
thing. If they are dominated by a higher need, this higher need will
seem to be the most
important of all. It then becomes possible, and indeed does actually
happen, that they
may, for the sake of this higher need, put themselves into the position
of being deprived
in a more basic need. We may expect that after a long-time deprivation
of the more basic
need there will be a tendency to reevaluate both needs so that the more
pre-potent need
will actually become consciously prepotent for the individual who may
have given it up
very lightly. Thus, a man who has given up his job rather than lose his
self-respect, and
who then starves for six months or so, may be willing to take his job
back even at the
price of losing his a self-respect.
(6) Another partial explanation of apparent reversals is seen in the
fact that we have been
talking about the hierarchy of prepotency in terms of consciously felt
wants or desires
rather than of behavior. Looking at behavior itself may give us the
wrong impression.
What we have claimed is that the person will want the more basic of two
needs when
deprived in both. There is no necessary implication here that he will
act upon his desires.
Let us say again that there are many determinants of behavior other than
the needs and
desires.
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
14
(7) Perhaps more important than all these exceptions are the ones that
involve ideals, high
social standards, high values and the like. With such values people
become martyrs; they
give up everything for the sake of a particular ideal, or value. These
people may be
understood, at least in part, by reference to one basic concept (or
hypothesis) which may
be called 'increased frustration-tolerance through early gratification'.
People who have
been satisfied in their basic needs throughout their lives, particularly
in their earlier years,
seem to develop exceptional power to withstand present or future
thwarting of these
needs simply because they have strong,[p. 388] healthy character
structure as a result of
basic satisfaction. They are the 'strong' people who can easily weather
disagreement or
opposition, who can swim against the stream of public opinion and who
can stand up for
the truth at great personal cost. It is just the ones who have loved and
been well loved,
and who have had many deep friendships who can hold out against hatred,
rejection or
persecution.
I say all this in spite of the fact that there is a certain amount of
sheer habituation which is
also involved in any full discussion of frustration tolerance. For
instance, it is likely that
those persons who have been accustomed to relative starvation for a long
time, are
partially enabled thereby to withstand food deprivation. What sort of
balance must be
made between these two tendencies, of habituation on the one hand, and
of past
satisfaction breeding present frustration tolerance on the other hand,
remains to be
worked out by further research. Meanwhile we may assume that they are
both operative,
side by side, since they do not contradict each other, In respect to
this phenomenon of
increased frustration tolerance, it seems probable that the most
important gratifications
come in the first two years of life. That is to say, people who have
been made secure and
strong in the earliest years, tend to remain secure and strong
thereafter in the face of
whatever threatens.
Degree of relative satisfaction. -- So far, our theoretical discussion
may have given the
impression that these five sets of needs are somehow in a step-wise,
all-or-none
relationships to each other. We have spoken in such terms as the
following: "If one need
is satisfied, then another emerges." This statement might give the false
impression that a
need must be satisfied 100 per cent before the next need emerges. In
actual fact, most
members of our society who are normal, are partially satisfied in all
their basic needs and
partially unsatisfied in all their basic needs at the same time. A more
realistic description
of the hierarchy would be in terms of decreasing percentages of
satisfaction as we go up
the hierarchy of prepotency, For instance, if I may assign arbitrary
figures for the sake of
illustration, it is as if the average citizen [p. 389] is satisfied
perhaps 85 per cent in his
physiological needs, 70 per cent in his safety needs, 50 per cent in his
love needs, 40 per
cent in his self-esteem needs, and 10 per cent in his self-actualization
needs.
As for the concept of emergence of a new need after satisfaction of the
prepotent need,
this emergence is not a sudden, saltatory phenomenon but rather a
gradual emergence by
slow degrees from nothingness. For instance, if prepotent need A is
satisfied only 10 per
cent: then need B may not be visible at all. However, as this need A
becomes satisfied 25
per cent, need B may emerge 5 per cent, as need A becomes satisfied 75
per cent need B
may emerge go per cent, and so on.
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
15
Unconscious character of needs. -- These needs are neither necessarily
conscious nor
unconscious. On the whole, however, in the average person, they are more
often
unconscious rather than conscious. It is not necessary at this point to
overhaul the
tremendous mass of evidence which indicates the crucial importance of
unconscious
motivation. It would by now be expected, on a priori grounds alone, that
unconscious
motivations would on the whole be rather more important than the
conscious motivations.
What we have called the basic needs are very often largely unconscious
although they
may, with suitable techniques, and with sophisticated people become
conscious.
Cultural specificity and generality of needs. -- This classification of
basic needs makes
some attempt to take account of the relative unity behind the
superficial differences in
specific desires from one culture to another. Certainly in any
particular culture an
individual's conscious motivational content will usually be extremely
different from the
conscious motivational content of an individual in another society.
However, it is the
common experience of anthropologists that people, even in different
societies, are much
more alike than we would think from our first contact with them, and
that as we know
them better we seem to find more and more of this commonness, We then
recognize the
most startling differences to be superficial rather than basic, e. g.,
differences in style of
hair-dress, clothes, tastes in food, etc. Our classification of basic
[p. 390] needs is in part
an attempt to account for this unity behind the apparent diversity from
culture to culture.
No claim is made that it is ultimate or universal for all cultures. The
claim is made only
that it is relatively more ultimate, more universal, more basic, than
the superficial
conscious desires from culture to culture, and makes a somewhat closer
approach to
common-human characteristics, Basic needs are more common-human than
superficial
desires or behaviors.
Multiple motivations of behavior. -- These needs must be understood not
to be exclusive
or single determiners of certain kinds of behavior. An example may be
found in any
behavior that seems to be physiologically motivated, such as eating, or
sexual play or the
like. The clinical psychologists have long since found that any behavior
may be a channel
through which flow various determinants. Or to say it in another way,
most behavior is
multi-motivated. Within the sphere of motivational determinants any
behavior tends to be
determined by several or all of the basic needs simultaneously rather
than by only one of
them. The latter would be more an exception than the former. Eating may
be partially for
the sake of filling the stomach, and partially for the sake of comfort
and amelioration of
other needs. One may make love not only for pure sexual release, but
also to convince
one's self of one's masculinity, or to make a conquest, to feel
powerful, or to win more
basic affection. As an illustration, I may point out that it would be
possible (theoretically
if not practically) to analyze a single act of an individual and see in
it the expression of
his physiological needs, his safety needs, his love needs, his esteem
needs and selfactualization.
This contrasts sharply with the more naive brand of trait psychology in
which one trait or one motive accounts for a certain kind of act, i. e.,
an aggressive act is
traced solely to a trait of aggressiveness.
Multiple determinants of behavior. -- Not all behavior is determined by
the basic needs.
We might even say that not all behavior is motivated. There are many
determinants of
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
16
behavior other than motives.[9] For instance, one other im-[p.
391]portant class of
determinants is the so-called 'field' determinants. Theoretically, at
least, behavior may be
determined completely by the field, or even by specific isolated
external stimuli, as in
association of ideas, or certain conditioned reflexes. If in response to
the stimulus word
'table' I immediately perceive a memory image of a table, this response
certainly has
nothing to do with my basic needs.
Secondly, we may call attention again to the concept of 'degree of
closeness to the basic
needs' or 'degree of motivation.' Some behavior is highly motivated,
other behavior is
only weakly motivated. Some is not motivated at all (but all behavior is
determined).
Another important point [10] is that there is a basic difference between
expressive
behavior and coping behavior (functional striving, purposive goal
seeking). An
expressive behavior does not try to do anything; it is simply a
reflection of the
personality. A stupid man behaves stupidly, not because he wants to, or
tries to, or is
motivated to, but simply because he is what he is. The same is true when
I speak in a bass
voice rather than tenor or soprano. The random movements of a healthy
child, the smile
on the face of a happy man even when he is alone, the springiness of the
healthy man's
walk, and the erectness of his carriage are other examples of
expressive, non-functional
behavior. Also the style in which a man carries out almost all his
behavior, motivated as
well as unmotivated, is often expressive.
We may then ask, is all behavior expressive or reflective of the
character structure? The
answer is 'No.' Rote, habitual, automatized, or conventional behavior
may or may not be
expressive. The same is true for most 'stimulus-bound' behaviors. It is
finally necessary to
stress that expressiveness of behavior, and goal-directedness of
behavior are not mutually
exclusive categories. Average behavior is usually both.
Goals as centering principle in motivation theory. -- It will be
observed that the basic
principle in our classification has [p. 392] been neither the
instigation nor the motivated
behavior but rather the functions, effects, purposes, or goals of the
behavior. It has been
proven sufficiently by various people that this is the most suitable
point for centering in
any motivation theory.[11]
Animal- and human-centering. -- This theory starts with the human being
rather than any
lower and presumably 'simpler' animal. Too many of the findings that
have been made in
animals have been proven to be true for animals but not for the human
being. There is no
reason whatsoever why we should start with animals in order to study
human motivation.
The logic or rather illogic behind this general fallacy of
'pseudo-simplicity' has been
exposed often enough by philosophers and logicians as well as by
scientists in each of the
various fields. It is no more necessary to study animals before one can
study man than it
is to study mathematics before one can study geology or psychology or
biology.
We may also reject the old, naive, behaviorism which assumed that it was
somehow
necessary, or at least more 'scientific' to judge human beings by animal
standards. One
consequence of this belief was that the whole notion of purpose and goal
was excluded
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
17
from motivational psychology simply because one could not ask a white
rat about his
purposes. Tolman (18) has long since proven in animal studies themselves
that this
exclusion was not necessary.
Motivation and the theory of psychopathogenesis. -- The conscious
motivational content
of everyday life has, according to the foregoing, been conceived to be
relatively
important or unimportant accordingly as it is more or less closely
related to the basic
goals. A desire for an ice cream cone might actually be an indirect
expression of a desire
for love. If it is, then this desire for the ice cream cone becomes
extremely important
motivation. If however the ice cream is simply something to cool the
mouth with, or a
casual appetitive reaction, then the desire is relatively unimportant.
Everyday conscious
desires are to be regarded as symptoms, as [p. 393] surface indicators
of more basic
needs. If we were to take these superficial desires at their face value
me would find
ourselves in a state of complete confusion which could never be
resolved, since we would
be dealing seriously with symptoms rather than with what lay behind the
symptoms.
Thwarting of unimportant desires produces no psychopathological results;
thwarting of a
basically important need does produce such results. Any theory of
psychopathogenesis
must then be based on a sound theory of motivation. A conflict or a
frustration is not
necessarily pathogenic. It becomes so only when it threatens or thwarts
the basic needs,
or partial needs that are closely related to the basic needs (10).
The role of gratified needs. -- It has been pointed out above several
times that our needs
usually emerge only when more prepotent needs have been gratified. Thus
gratification
has an important role in motivation theory. Apart from this, however,
needs cease to play
an active determining or organizing role as soon as they are gratified.
What this means is that, e. g., a basically satisfied person no longer
has the needs for
esteem, love, safety, etc. The only sense in which he might be said to
have them is in the
almost metaphysical sense that a sated man has hunger, or a filled
bottle has emptiness. If
we are interested in what actually motivates us, and not in what has,
will, or might
motivate us, then a satisfied need is not a motivator. It must be
considered for all practical
purposes simply not to exist, to have disappeared. This point should be
emphasized
because it has been either overlooked or contradicted in every theory of
motivation I
know.[12] The perfectly healthy, normal, fortunate man has no sex needs
or hunger
needs, or needs for safety, or for love, or for prestige, or
self-esteem, except in stray
moments of quickly passing threat. If we were to say otherwise, we
should also have to
aver that every man had all the pathological reflexes, e. g., Babinski,
etc., because if his
nervous system were damaged, these would appear.
It is such considerations as these that suggest the bold [p. 394]
postulation that a man
who is thwarted in any of his basic needs may fairly be envisaged simply
as a sick man.
This is a fair parallel to our designation as 'sick' of the man who
lacks vitamins or
minerals. Who is to say that a lack of love is less important than a
lack of vitamins? Since
we know the pathogenic effects of love starvation, who is to say that we
are invoking
value-questions in an unscientific or illegitimate way, any more than
the physician does
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
18
who diagnoses and treats pellagra or scurvy? If I were permitted this
usage, I should then
say simply that a healthy man is primarily motivated by his needs to
develop and
actualize his fullest potentialities and capacities. If a man has any
other basic needs in any
active, chronic sense, then he is simply an unhealthy man. He is as
surely sick as if he
had suddenly developed a strong salt-hunger or calcium hunger.[13]
If this statement seems unusual or paradoxical the reader may be assured
that this is only
one among many such paradoxes that will appear as we revise our ways of
looking at
man's deeper motivations. When we ask what man wants of life, we deal
with his very
essence.
IV. SUMMARY
(1) There are at least five sets of goals, which we may call basic
needs. These are briefly
physiological, safety, love, 'esteem, and self-actualization. In
addition, we are motivated
by the desire to achieve or maintain the various conditions upon which
these basic
satisfactions rest and by certain more intellectual desires.
(2) These basic goals are related to each other, being arranged in a
hierarchy of
prepotency. This means that the most prepotent goal will monopolize
consciousness and
will tend of itself to organize the recruitment of the various
capacities of the organism.
The less prepotent needs are [p. 395] minimized, even forgotten or
denied. But when a
need is fairly well satisfied, the next prepotent ('higher') need
emerges, in turn to
dominate the conscious life and to serve as the center of organization
of behavior, since
gratified needs are not active motivators.
Thus man is a perpetually wanting animal. Ordinarily the satisfaction of
these wants is
not altogether mutually exclusive, but only tends to be. The average
member of our
society is most often partially satisfied and partially unsatisfied in
all of his wants. The
hierarchy principle is usually empirically observed in terms of
increasing percentages of
non-satisfaction as we go up the hierarchy. Reversals of the average
order of the
hierarchy are sometimes observed. Also it has been observed that an
individual may
permanently lose the higher wants in the hierarchy under special
conditions. There are
not only ordinarily multiple motivations for usual behavior, but in
addition many
determinants other than motives.
(3) Any thwarting or possibility of thwarting of these basic human
goals, or danger to the
defenses which protect them, or to the conditions upon which they rest,
is considered to
be a psychological threat. With a few exceptions, all psychopathology
may be partially
traced to such threats. A basically thwarted man may actually be defined
as a 'sick' man,
if we wish.
(4) It is such basic threats which bring about the general emergency
reactions.
(5) Certain other basic problems have not been dealt with because of
limitations of space.
Among these are (a) the problem of values in any definitive motivation
theory, (b) the
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
19
relation between appetites, desires, needs and what is 'good' for the
organism, (c) the
etiology of the basic needs and their possible derivation in early
childhood, (d)
redefinition of motivational concepts, i. e., drive, desire, wish, need,
goal, (e) implication
of our theory for hedonistic theory, (f) the nature of the uncompleted
act, of success and
failure, and of aspiration-level, (g) the role of association, habit and
conditioning, (h)
relation to the [p. 396] theory of inter-personal relations, (i)
implications for
psychotherapy, (j) implication for theory of society, (k) the theory of
selfishness, (l) the
relation between needs and cultural patterns, (m) the relation between
this theory and
Alport's theory of functional autonomy. These as well as certain other
less important
questions must be considered as motivation theory attempts to become
definitive.
Notes
[1] As the child grows up, sheer knowledge and familiarity as well as
better motor
development make these 'dangers' less and less dangerous and more and more
manageable. Throughout life it may be said that one of the main conative
functions of
education is this neutralizing of apparent dangers through knowledge, e.
g., I am not
afraid of thunder because I know something about it.
[2] A 'test battery' for safety might be confronting the child with a
small exploding
firecracker, or with a bewhiskered face; having the mother leave the
room, putting him
upon a high ladder, a hypodermic injection, having a mouse crawl up to
him, etc. Of
course I cannot seriously recommend the deliberate use of such 'tests'
for they might very
well harm the child being tested. But these and similar situations come
up by the score in
the child's ordinary day-to-day living and may be observed. There is no
reason why those
stimuli should not be used with, far example, young chimpanzees.
[3] Not all neurotic individuals feel unsafe. Neurosis may have at its
core a thwarting of
the affection and esteem needs in a person who is generally safe.
[4] For further details see (12) and (16, Chap. 5).
[5] Whether or not this particular desire is universal we do not know.
The crucial
question, especially important today, is "Will men who are enslaved and
dominated
inevitably feel dissatisfied and rebellious?" We may assume on the basis
of commonly
known clinical data that a man who has known true freedom (not paid for
by giving up
safety and security but rather built on the basis of adequate safety and
security) will not
willingly or easily allow his freedom to be taken away from him. But we
do not know
that this is true for the person born into slavery. The events of the
next decade should
give us our answer. See discussion of this problem in (5).
[6] Perhaps the desire for prestige and respect from others is
subsidiary to the desire for
self-esteem or confidence in oneself. Observation of children seems to
indicate that this is
so, but clinical data give no clear support for such a conclusion.
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
20
[7] For more extensive discussion of normal self-esteem, as well as for
reports of various
researches, see (11).
[8] Clearly creative behavior, like painting, is like any other behavior
in having multiple,
determinants. It may be seen in 'innately creative' people whether they
are satisfied or
not, happy or unhappy, hungry or sated. Also it is clear that creative
activity may be
compensatory, ameliorative or purely economic. It is my impression (as
yet unconfirmed)
that it is possible to distinguish the artistic and intellectual
products of basically satisfied
people from those of basically unsatisfied people by inspection alone.
In any case, here
too we must distinguish, in a dynamic fashion, the overt behavior itself
from its various
motivations or purposes.
[9] I am aware that many psychologists md psychoanalysts use the term
'motivated' and
'determined' synonymously, e. g., Freud. But I consider this an
obfuscating usage. Sharp
distinctions are necessary for clarity of thought, and precision in
experimentation.
[10] To be discussed fully in a subsequent publication.
[11] The interested reader is referred to the very excellent discussion
of this point in
Murray's Explorations in Personality (15).
[12] Note that acceptance of this theory necessitates basic revision of
the Freudian theory.
[13] If we were to use the word 'sick' in this way, we should then also
have to face
squarely the relations of man to his society. One clear implication of
our definition would
be that (1) since a man is to be called sick who is basically thwarted,
and (2) since such
basic thwarting is made possible ultimately only by forces outside the
individual, then (3)
sickness in the individual must come ultimately from sickness in the
society. The 'good'
or healthy society would then be defined as one that permitted man's
highest purposes to
emerge by satisfying all his prepotent basic needs.
References
1. ADLER, A. Social interest. London: Faber & Faber, 1938.
2. CANNON, W. B. Wisdom of the body. New York: Norton, 1932.
3. FREUD, A. The ego and the mechanisms of defense. London: Hogarth, 1937.
4. FREUD, S. New introductory lectures on psychoanalysis. New York:
Norton, 1933.
5. FROMM, E. Escape from freedom. New York: Farrar and Rinehart, 1941.
A THEORY OF HUMAN MOTIVATION
Get any book for free on: www.Abika.com
21
6. GOLDSTEIN, K. The organism. New York: American Book Co., 1939.
7. HORNEY, K. The neurotic personality of our time. New York: Norton, 1937.
8. KARDINER, A. The traumatic neuroses of war. New York: Hoeber, 1941.
9. LEVY, D. M. Primary affect hunger. Amer. J. Psychiat., 1937, 94, 643-652.
10. MASLOW, A. H. Conflict, frustration, and the theory of threat. J.
abnorm. (soc.)
Psychol., 1943, 38, 81-86.
11. ----------. Dominance, personality and social behavior in women. J.
soc. Psychol.,
1939, 10, 3-39.
12. ----------. The dynamics of psychological security-insecurity.
Character & Pers.,
1942, 10, 331-344.
13. ----------. A preface to motivation theory. Psychosomatic Med.,
1943, 5, 85-92.
14. ----------. & MITTLEMANN, B. Principles of abnormal psychology. New
York:
Harper & Bros., 1941.
15. MURRAY, H. A., et al. Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford
University
Press, 1938.
16. PLANT, J. Personality and the cultural pattern. New York:
Commonwealth Fund,
1937.
17. SHIRLEY, M. Children's adjustments to a strange situation. J.
abrnorm. (soc.)
Psychol., 1942, 37, 201-217.
18. TOLMAN, E. C. Purposive behavior in animals and men. New York:
Century, 1932.
19. WERTHEIMER, M. Unpublished lectures at the New School for Social
Research.
20. YOUNG, P. T. Motivation of behavior. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1936.
21. ----------. The experimental analysis of appetite. Psychol. Bull.,
1941, 38, 129-164.



--
Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f

Sponsor:
Alto rendimento, massima libertà. È Conto Arancio di ING Direct.
Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=659&d=22-9