Hubley, Candice2020-07-302020-07-302020-07-302020-07-20http://hdl.handle.net/10012/16090Although intrinsic motivation is often viewed as preferable to more extrinsic forms of motivation, there is evidence that the adaptiveness of these motivational states depends on the nature of the task being completed (e.g., Cerasoli, Nicklin, & Ford, 2014). Specifically, research suggests that intrinsic motivation tends to support better performance on open-ended tasks involving qualitative performance assessment (e.g., creative writing), while extrinsic motivation supports better performance on close-ended tasks involving quantitative performance assessment (e.g., multiple choice). This thesis examined people’s metamotivational beliefs regarding this type of task-motivation fit. Across three studies (N = 854), participants provided beliefs about the usefulness of different types of motivation-regulation strategies: strategies that enhance one’s interest and enjoyment in a task versus strategies that focus on the value associated with task outcomes (both self-relevance strategies and reward strategies). Overall, participants reported that interest-enhancing and self-relevance strategies would be more helpful for open-ended versus close-ended tasks (Studies 1, 2, and 3), whereas reward strategies would be more helpful for close-ended tasks (Studies 2 and 3). These beliefs predicted consequential behavioral choices (Study 2) and task performance (Study 3). Implications for understanding effective self-regulation are discussed.enmetamotivationintrinsic motivationextrinsic motivationautonomous motivationself-regulationMaster Thesis