Drive Reduction Theory

Imagine a hot summer’s day in the middle of July. You are stuck in traffic and you cannot stop sweating, so you crank up the air conditioner and immediately start to feel more comfortable.

A scenario so simple and obvious was actually once based on a profound psychological theory called the drive-reduction theory of motivation.

• We will define the drive-reduction theory.
• We'll provide common examples seen in everyday life.
• We'll go over both the criticisms and strengths of the drive reduction theory.

Drive Reduction Theory of Motivation

This theory is just one of the many psychological explanations for the topic of motivation. In psychology, motivation is the force that gives direction and meaning behind the behaviors or actions of an individual, whether or not that person is conscious of said force (APA, 2007).

Drive-reduction theory was proposed by a psychologist named Clark L. Hull in 1943. The theory is founded on the idea that motivation comes from the body’s physiological need to maintain homeostasis and equilibrium in all functions and systems. Basically, this means that the body leaves a state of equilibrium or balance whenever there is a biological need; this creates a drive for certain behavior.

In this example, hunger, fatigue, and cold temperatures create an instinctual drive that the body must reduce in order to reach the goal of maintaining homeostasis.

Drive Reduction Theory Strengths

While this theory is not heavily relied upon in recent studies of motivation, ideas first mooted within it are extremely helpful when explaining many topics relating to biological processes of motivation.

How do we explain the motivation of eating when we are hungry? How about when our body produces sweat to cool down our internal temperature? Why do we experience feelings of thirst, and then drink water or fancy electrolyte juices?

One of the major strengths of this theory is the explanation for these exact biological circumstances. The “discomfort” in the body when it is NOT in homeostasis is considered the drive. This drive needs to be reduced to reach that balance.

With this theory, these natural motivators became easier to explain and observe, especially in complex studies. This was a useful framework when considering further biological occurrences involving motivation.

Criticism of Drive Reduction Theory

To reiterate, there are many other valid theories of motivation that, over time, have become more relevant to studies of motivation compared to drive-reduction theory. While drive-reduction theory does build a strong case for the explanation of biological processes of motivation, it lacks the ability to be generalized across all instances of motivation (Cherry, 2020).

Motivation outside of the biological and physiological realm cannot be explained by Clark Hull’s theory of drive-reduction. This is a major issue with the theory considering we humans employ instances of motivation for an abundance of other needs and desires.

Fg. 1 Drive reduction theory and motivation to be risky, unsplash.com

Skydiving is one of the most anxiety-inducing sports. Not only are skydivers gambling with their own lives when jumping from a plane, they pay hundreds (even thousands) of dollars to do so!

An extremely risky activity like this would surely throw off the body’s homeostasis by increasing stress levels and fear, so where does this motivation come from?

This is another of drive-reduction theory's flaws. It cannot account for a human’s motivation to endure a tension-filled act or behavior, as it is not an act to restore a balanced internal state. This example contradicts the entire theory, which is that motivation comes solely from the drive to fulfill primary biological and physiological needs.

This criticism applies to many actions that contradict the theory such as the urge to ride rollercoasters, watch scary movies, and go white-water rafting.