Difference between revisions of "Kellers Motivational Model"

Revision as of 01:06, 2 September 2012

This site is sponsored by the University of Colorado

Keller's ARCS Motivational Model

Acronym

ARCS stands for: Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction

Alternate name(s)

Keller's ARCS Theory of Motivation

Main construct(s)/factor(s)

Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction

Concise description of theory

Originally designed to study how to effectively motivate learning. This theory is grounded in the Expectancy-value theory which purports that perceived success (expectancy) and perceived satisfaction of personal needs (value) drive motivation of an individual to perform an activity. Keller's ARCS Model believes that people will engage in an activity if they believe they will succeed at it and it will satisfy their personal needs. It consists of four factors that create and maintain motivation for learning in people and also strategies to achieve them.

Modified from: http://www.learning-theories.com/kellers-arcs-model-of-motivational-design.html http://www.personal.psu.edu/hoh5021/kb/motivation.htm

Diagram/schematic of theory

Source: http://edel518spring2011.wikispaces.com/Hypermedia

Originating author(s)

Keller (1979)

Seminal articles

Merrill, M. D. (1999). Instructional Transaction Theory (ITT): Instructional Design Based on Knowledge Objects. Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory, Vol. II. (pp. 397-424). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Keller, J. M., & Suzaki, K. (1988). Use of the ARCS Motivation Model in Courseware Design. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Instructional Designs for Microcomputer Courseware. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Originating area

Effective motivation of learning, Learning theory

IS articles that use the theory

Weibell, C. J. (2011). Principles of learning: A conceptual framework for domain-specific theories of learning. Available at [1]

Links from this theory to other theories

Expectancy value theory

External links

[2], Edu Wiki entry on Kellers Motivational Model
[3], Principles of Learning

Original Contributor(s)

Oluyomi Olufemi Kabiawu

Please feel free to make modifications to this site. In order to do so, you must register.

Return to Theories Used in IS Research

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 == Concise description of theory ==
-Absorptive capacity is a firm’s ability to identify, assimilate, transform, and apply valuable external knowledge. Put another way, absorptive capacity is a limit to the rate or quantity of scientific or technological information that a firm can absorb. Conceptually, it is similar to information processing theory, but at the firm level rather than the individual level. Absorptive capacity was introduced by Cohen and Levinthal in 1990.
+Originally designed to study how to effectively motivate learning. This theory is grounded in the Expectancy-value theory which purports that perceived success (expectancy) and perceived satisfaction of personal needs (value) drive motivation of an individual to perform an activity. Keller's ARCS Model believes that people will engage in an activity if they believe they will succeed at it and it will satisfy their personal needs. It consists of four factors that create and maintain motivation for learning in people and also strategies to achieve them.
-Zahra and George (2002) extended the theory by specifying four distinct dimensions to absorptive capacity: acquisition, assimilation, transformation and exploitation. However, Todorova and Durisin (2007) seriously question Zahra and George's reconceptualization of absorptive capacity.
-When absorption limits exist, they provide one explanation for firms to develop internal R&D capacities. R&D departments can not only conduct development along lines they are already familiar with, but they have formal training and external professional connections that make it possible for them to evaluate and incorporate externally generated technical knowledge into the firm. In other words, a partial explanation for R&D investments by firms is to work around the absorptive capacity constraint.
-It is useful to note that almost all organizational literature, including Cohen and Levinthal’s (1989; 1990) original work, treats absorptive capacity as an organizational-level construct (Lane et al. 2006). Although absorptive capacity does have antecedents and consequences, it is not composed of a statement of relations among concepts within a set of assumptions and boundaries. Thus, absorptive <span class="plainlinks">[http://www.diamondlinks.net <span style="color:black;font-weight:normal; text-decoration:none!important; background:none!important; text-decoration:none;">link building service</span>] capacity is a construct, not a theory.
+Modified from: [https://sites.google.com/site/motivationataglanceischool/arcs-motivation-model http://www.learning-theories.com/kellers-arcs-model-of-motivational-design.html http://www.personal.psu.edu/hoh5021/kb/motivation.htm]
-Modified from: [http://economics.about.com/cs/economicsglossary/g/absorptive_cap.htm http://economics.about.com/cs/economicsglossary/g/absorptive_cap.htm]
 == Diagram/schematic of theory ==