ABSTRACT
As a prelude to my thoughts about the chapters in this volume, it would be helpful to the reader to know a bit about my background so that he Of she knows my biases. Jack Atkinson was my grand advisor, so to speak. Joel Raynor was my advisor and Jack's student. I have been influenced by Atkinson's thinking (e.g., Atkinson, 1964; Atkinson & Raynor, 1974) ever since. Atkinson was the originator of the expectancy value theory of achievement motivation (Atkinson, \964) and the more general expectancy value theory of the dynamics of action (Atkinson & Birch, 1970; 1978). He was a strong believer in Lewin's dictum that 8 = f(P,E} and in Lewin's quest for fonnal theories of human motivation (Lewin, 1935). Few people are aware that for Atkinson, achievement motivation was only a tool for a more general theory of motivation (see Atkinson, 1964, Chapter 10). Atkinson 's theories included mUltiple motives and multiple incentives, which can be seen in his higher order theoretical statements. Atkinson's proudest accomplishment was his theory of the dynamics of action or DOA. This theory not only considered all types of approach and avoidance motives interacting with situational determinants, but considered these interactions as action tendencies, competing against or combining with other tendencies for expression in action. The major thrust of his theory is that behavior is not static. It is not whether a tendency will be expressed in action, but when. Once that tendency has been expressed and the behavior consumed, other tendencies are at the ready. Our recent research has continued in this tradition, attempting to incorporate informational influences, via individual differences in uncertainty orientation, into his theory (see Sorrentino & Roney, 2000; Sorrentino, Smithson, Hodson, Roney & Walker, 2002).
