<p>I've <a href="https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/0805828974" rel="nofollow noreferrer" rel="nofollow noreferrer">read</a> that extrinsic rewards can decrease intrinsic interest. If you want to kill someone's interest in activity X, an effective method would be to reward them for doing X (e.g. give them money, or recognition, etc.). This makes the person believe that they're doing X only for the reward. Then after a while, take away the rewards. The person will then have no interest in doing X.</p>
<p>Stack Exchange has a brilliant system based on reputation points, that motivates people to contribute high quality questions and answers. But is there a hidden cost?</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Does Stack Exchange's extrinsic reward system decrease intrinsic interest in asking and answering  questions?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>On a more personal level: I ask a lot of questions on Mathematics Stack Exchange, and enjoy getting upvotes. I wonder, if Stack Exchange suddenly disappeared, would I find myself less curious about mathematics?</p>
<p>(I hope my question doesn't come across as antagonistic towards Stack Exchange.)</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-25T14:07:11.333Z
Also see: [What is the motivation model behind StackExchange?](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/q/25253/7001)
Arnon Weinberg
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-26T06:54:04.787Z
Does this answer your question? [What is the motivation model behind StackExchange?](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/25253/what-is-the-motivation-model-behind-stackexchange)
Chris Rogers
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-26T07:03:30.200Z
Hi @ArnonWeinberg, ChrisR, I reckon the answers contain the answer, yet the linked Q is posed very differently.
AliceD
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-26T07:20:38.177Z
Although posed differently, @AliceD, does this not still pose the same question?
Chris Rogers
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-26T07:54:22.580Z
@ChrisRogers when reading both Qs; no I don't think so, yet the accepted A to linked Q answers this Q perfectly. I would however opt not to dupe-close this one because the Q is substantially different. Let's see what the other mods think of this.
AliceD
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-26T09:19:43.920Z
@ChrisRogers I would say that it does not answer my question. It's asking what motivates people to participate on SE; I'm asking if the reward system produces a certain kind of result (decrease in intrinsic interest). One of the answers there goes on a tangent, saying "if [the overjustification effect] is real and applicable to the StackExchange, then there is a danger that initially intrinsically motivated contributors might become dependent on the extrinsic rewards over time. Complicated." That is pretty much my question here.
Dan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-26T13:04:11.463Z
@Dan I don't think you're going to get a more complete answer than that, though.
Bryan Krause
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-26T14:14:45.850Z
I agree with @AliceD's and Dan's assessment. These questions are not duplicates. And, I can commend Dan on asking a more focused question, also including clear rationale backed by literature. Whether or not no more complete answer can be given NOW, shouldn't impact whether this is a duplicate. Keeping posterity in mind, additional/other answers can be posted over time. Anyone is welcome to post that answer (with a link to the other answer) for now.
Steven Jeuris
<motivation>
Does Stack Exchange's extrinsic reward system decrease intrinsic interest in asking and answering questions?
Dan
# Does Stack Exchange's extrinsic reward system decrease intrinsic interest in asking and answering questions?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-04-25)

I've [read](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/0805828974) that extrinsic rewards can decrease intrinsic interest. If you want to kill someone's interest in activity X, an effective method would be to reward them for doing X (e.g. give them money, or recognition, etc.). This makes the person believe that they're doing X only for the reward. Then after a while, take away the rewards. The person will then have no interest in doing X.

Stack Exchange has a brilliant system based on reputation points, that motivates people to contribute high quality questions and answers. But is there a hidden cost?

> Does Stack Exchange's extrinsic reward system decrease intrinsic interest in asking and answering questions?

On a more personal level: I ask a lot of questions on Mathematics Stack Exchange, and enjoy getting upvotes. I wonder, if Stack Exchange suddenly disappeared, would I find myself less curious about mathematics?

(I hope my question doesn't come across as antagonistic towards Stack Exchange.)

**Tags:** motivation

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Also see: [What is the motivation model behind StackExchange?](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/q/25253/7001)  
> **username_2**: Does this answer your question? [What is the motivation model behind StackExchange?](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/25253/what-is-the-motivation-model-behind-stackexchange)  
> **username_3**: Hi @ArnonWeinberg, ChrisR, I reckon the answers contain the answer, yet the linked Q is posed very differently.  
> **username_2**: Although posed differently, @username_3, does this not still pose the same question?  
> **username_3**: @ChrisRogers when reading both Qs; no I don't think so, yet the accepted A to linked Q answers this Q perfectly. I would however opt not to dupe-close this one because the Q is substantially different. Let's see what the other mods think of this.  
> **username_0**: @ChrisRogers I would say that it does not answer my question. It's asking what motivates people to participate on SE; I'm asking if the reward system produces a certain kind of result (decrease in intrinsic interest). One of the answers there goes on a tangent, saying "if [the overjustification effect] is real and applicable to the StackExchange, then there is a danger that initially intrinsically motivated contributors might become dependent on the extrinsic rewards over time. Complicated." That is pretty much my question here.  
> **username_4**: @username_0 I don't think you're going to get a more complete answer than that, though.  
> **username_5**: I agree with @username_3's and username_0's assessment. These questions are not duplicates. And, I can commend username_0 on asking a more focused question, also including clear rationale backed by literature. Whether or not no more complete answer can be given NOW, shouldn't impact whether this is a duplicate. Keeping posterity in mind, additional/other answers can be posted over time. Anyone is welcome to post that answer (with a link to the other answer) for now.  

---

## 0 answers

