Directed Motivational Currents and Language Education. Christine Muir
The first derives from the fact that self-concordant goals are connected to an individual’s self-concept (see Chapter 1) and core sense of being, meaning that goal striving pushes individuals to act in ways that are identity-congruent. The second feature relates to DMCs as a manifestation of periods of intense long-term motivation. As Sheldon and Elliot (1999: 483) explain: ‘the developing interests and deep-seated values that such goals express are relatively enduring facets of personality’. We should not be surprised, therefore, that self-concordant goals tend not only to be pursued with more determination and vigour, but are also sustained over time in a generally more persistent manner.
An interesting narrative is offered by Ibrahim (2017), who suggests that goals for L2 DMCs often emerge from or are rooted in self-concordant goals that are held in other areas of an individual’s life. He describes the translation of goals from one domain to another as occurring when a participant’s self-concordant goal is paired with a suitable trigger (see following section). It was only at this point that his participants’ goals ‘changed from general to specific, from non-L2 to L2 related, and from abstract to tangible’ (Ibrahim, 2017: 29). Among several examples of this, Ibrahim offers that of Alan, whose L2 German DMC was sparked when he was required to reach a certain proficiency so that he might be offered a visa to move to Germany to live with his wife. A second example offered is that of Ali, whose L2 English DMC was sparked after an unsuccessful job interview, a change rooted in a desire to work in an ‘environment with more opportunities for personal growth’ (Ibrahim, 2017: 29). A similar example can be found in Selҫuk and Erten (2017: 134), who quote a learner describing their L2 English DMC goal: ‘I felt that it would give me something more than learning an only language; it would enable me to be a successful and active person in my future life.’ All these goals clearly have a very high level of self-concordance: they are far bigger than being rooted solely in the further development of L2 competence.
Proximal subgoals
Research into proximal subgoals began in 1977 with the publication of a paper by Bandura and Simon examining the relative effects of different goal setting conditions on individuals’ dieting success. The authors found that individuals who set more regular subgoals achieved a substantially greater weight loss, leading them to conclude that proximal subgoals have a key motivational role. This finding, relating to the functioning of distal and proximal goals, has since been replicated in multiple contexts, both outside and within the field of education (cf. Bandura & Schunk, 1981).
This line of research was extended in 2004 by Miller and Brickman. Their starting point linked to self-concordant goals: they found that such ‘self-relevant’ goals created the foundation for individuals to ‘purposefully generate a coherent framework or system of proximal subgoals to guide action toward the attainment of those valued future goals’ (Miller & Brickman, 2004: 15). This is reminiscent of DMCs that spiral upwards, with motivation increasing exponentially towards an end goal. A good example of this would be a DMC experienced in the run up to ‘race day’ after months of training for a half-marathon (such as Caroline’s experience as described in Dörnyei et al., 2016). Miller and Brickman explain: ‘As the system of subgoals becomes clearer and particular subgoals are accomplished, the level of commitment to the future goals grows stronger (Markus and Ruvolo, 1989)’ (Miller & Brickman, 2004: 15). A further function of proximal subgoals therefore also connects to the affective reactions elicited as each subgoal is completed, and this is a key contributor in maintaining the motivational current and in driving motivation onwards. Further to offering the final piece in the puzzle of our understanding of goals within DMCs, proximal subgoals, as we will see, also play a crucial part in the functioning of a DMC’s structure.
(2) The Launch of a DMC
A second key feature of the DMC framework is the existence of a clearly defined starting point and identifiable trigger. The initiation of a DMC is dependent on two key factors: ‘the alignment of the necessary conditions (i.e., contextual, personal and time factors), and the availability of a specific triggering stimulus’ (Dörnyei et al., 2016: 59). In this section, I explore the basis of these initial conditions and triggering stimuli in more detail, and explain how it is they function together to maintain a continued flow of motivation through a process of continued re-triggering.
Initial conditions
Concordant with a complexity approach (see Chapter 1), a triggering stimulus will only be effective in conjunction with an appropriate configuration of initial conditions. So far in this chapter I have already touched on several important conditions: for example, a strongly self-concordant goal and the existence of a clear and appropriate set of proximal subgoals. A further key condition is a complete sense of ownership and control over the process and its outcome: individuals must feel capable of achieving success, both at each individual stage and ultimately overall. Ajzen (1991) labelled this perceived behavioural control, and defines it as an individual’s personal belief that they are capable of achieving their goal because it lies within their means to achieve a favourable outcome. A key principle of flow theory is the importance of an appropriate balance between challenge and skill, and this notion is similarly important within DMCs. However, while this delicate balancing act leads to the inherently fragile nature of the flow experience (Csikszentmihalyi, 1988), DMCs are far more robust due to their elaborate re-triggering mechanism (I return to discuss this in detail in the following sections).
A final key condition for the emergence of a DMC involves a link between an openness to the DMC experience and a ready disposition to engage positively with projects in a concentrated and conscientious manner. In personality psychology, research has investigated the correlates of a propensity to experience flow and has confirmed the existence of an autotelic personality (that is, someone particularly prone to experiencing flow-like experiences, Csikszentmihalyi, 1975/2000; see also Harmat et al.’s, 2016, edited volume). The aforesaid disposition is understood as a particular set of metaskills and competencies that combine to enable an individual to enter and stay in flow (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2002). These metaskills include ‘a general curiosity and interest in life, persistence and low self-centeredness’ (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2002: 93). Findings have demonstrated a strong negative relationship between autotelic personalities and procrastination (Ross & Keiser, 2014) and, conversely, that conscientiousness (Ross & Keiser, 2014), novelty-seeking and persistence (Teng, 2011) may be positively related to the likelihood of experiencing flow.
Baumann and Scheffer have further identified an achievement flow motive, a composite construct involving total absorption in an activity, high concentration without effort, and the merging of thought and action. The authors argue that it is an ‘amalgam of the aroused need to master challenging tasks (seeking or seeing difficulty) and its mastery-approach implementation (mastering difficulty)’ (Baumann & Scheffer, 2010: 1306). In Dörnyei et al. (2016), we posited that this construct offers an integration of the dispositions mentioned above and forms a bridge to Elliot’s (2008) concept of approach motivation (it is worth remembering from the previous chapter the definition of DMCs as an optimal form of approach motivation). This growing literature clearly suggests that there are certain characteristics that make people particularly susceptible to experiencing flow, and it is likely that some of these may also apply to DMCs. This is a fascinating area for further study.
Triggering stimuli
In order for a DMC to emerge, a clearly identifiable (although often only retrospectively) trigger is required to initiate action: this is the final piece of the puzzle falling into place, sparking a DMC into being. As the body of research into DMCs has grown, so has the number of DMC triggers that have been identified. The type that I have most often referred to so far throughout this book has been an opportunity for action – for example, the chance to take part in a half-marathon (e.g. Caroline’s experience described in Dörnyei et al., 2016). Safdari and Maftoon (2017) describe a similar opportunistic trigger in an L2 context, born from the chance to move to Italy. Ibrahim (2017) identified further triggers, including emergent opportunities, moments of realization/awakening, new information, negative emotion and new connections