Motivation is important, but can it be improved? Examining faculty perceptions of research motivation and productivity interventions

Abstract Faculty motivation has been demonstrated to be a critical factor in research success; however, developers of interventions aimed at boosting research productivity have rarely explicitly focused on faculty motivation. This study explored faculty beliefs about whether their research motivation could be strengthened, their plans to improve research productivity, their opinions on standard interventions, and how their current levels of motivation and success influence their intentions to change. A survey of 580 USA STEM faculty revealed four differently motivated faculty groups based on self-determination theory: (1) improvement-striving faculty were mostly international, untenured faculty actively seeking to boost productivity through raising autonomous motivation; (2) high satisfaction of basic needs faculty were primarily domestic, tenured full professors who saw no need for change in motivation or productivity; (3) improvement-avoidant faculty recognized room for growth but delayed action, often driven by controlled motivation; and (4) faculty with low satisfaction of the basic needs were at risk of amotivation and not attempting to improve, possibly needing individualized support. The most common research interventions faculty previously participated in were “Research groups involving graduate students” and “Research skills training/workshop/seminar”; in contrast, “Designated research time (course release, sabbatical)” and “Monetary awards and/or recognition for research” were the research professional development interventions faculty most believed would improve their motivation, productivity, and likelihood to participate. The results of the current study will inform higher education institutions striving to increase faculty scholarly productivity by using motivation-based interventions to achieve measurable gains.