www.all- about - psychology.com
Present s
A Th e or y of H u m a n M ot iva t ion
A. H. Maslow ( 1943)
I . I N TROD UCTI ON
I n a previous paper ( 13) various proposit ions were present ed which
w ould have t o be included in any t heory of hum an m ot ivat ion t hat
could lay claim t o being definit ive. These conclusions m ay be briefly
sum m arized as follows:
1. The int egrat ed wholeness of t he organism m ust be one of t he
foundat ion st ones of m ot ivat ion t heory.
2. The hunger drive ( or any ot her physiological drive) w as rej ect ed as
a cent ering point or m odel for a definit ive t heory of m ot ivat ion. Any
drive t hat is som at ically based and localizable was shown t o be
at ypical rat her t han t ypical in hum an m ot ivat ion.
3. Such a t heory should st ress and cent er it self upon ult im at e or basic
goals rat her t han part ial or superficial ones, upon ends rat her t han
m eans t o t hese ends. Such a st ress w ould im ply a m ore cent ral place
for unconscious t han for conscious m ot ivat ions.
4. There are usually available various cult ural pat hs t o t he sam e goal.
Therefore conscious, specific, local- cult ural desires are not as
fundam ent al in m ot ivat ion t heory as t he m ore basic, unconscious
goals.
5. Any m ot ivat ed behavior, eit her preparat ory or consum m at ory, m ust
be underst ood t o be a channel t hrough which m any basic needs m ay
be sim ult aneously expressed or sat isfied. Typically an act has m ore
6. Pract ically all organism ic st at es are t o be underst ood as m ot ivat ed
and as m ot ivat ing.
7. Hum an needs arrange t hem selves in hierarchies of pre- pot ency.
That is t o say, t he appearance of one need usually rest s on t he prior
sat isfact ion of anot her, m ore pre- pot ent need. Man is a perpet ually
w ant ing anim al. Also no need or drive can be t reat ed as if it w ere
isolat ed or discret e; every drive is relat ed t o t he st at e of sat isfact ion or
dissat isfact ion of ot her drives.
8. List s of drives w ill get us nowhere for various t heoret ical and
pract ical reasons. Furt herm ore any classificat ion of m ot ivat ions m ust
deal w it h t he problem of levels of specificit y or generalizat ion t he
m ot ives t o be classified.
9. Classificat ions of m ot ivat ions m ust be based upon goals rat her t han
upon inst igat ing drives or m ot ivat ed behavior.
10. Mot ivat ion t heory should be hum an- cent ered rat her t han anim
al-cent ered.
11. The sit uat ion or t he field in w hich t he organism react s m ust be
t aken int o account but t he field alone can rarely serve as an exclusive
explanat ion for behavior. Furt herm ore t he field it self m ust be
int erpret ed in t erm s of t he organism . Field t heory cannot be a
subst it ut e for m ot ivat ion t heory.
12. Not only t he int egrat ion of t he organism m ust be t aken int o
segm ent al react ions. I t has since becom e necessary t o add t o t hese
anot her affirm at ion.
13. Mot ivat ion t heory is not synonym ous w it h behavior t heory. The
m ot ivat ions are only one class of det erm inant s of behavior. While
behavior is alm ost alw ays m ot ivat ed, it is also alm ost alw ays
biologically, cult urally and sit uat ionally det erm ined as w ell.
The present paper is an at t em pt t o form ulat e a posit ive t heory of
m ot ivat ion w hich w ill sat isfy t hese t heoret ical dem ands and at t he
sam e t im e conform t o t he know n fact s, clinical and observat ional as
w ell as experim ent al. I t derives m ost direct ly, however, from clinical
experience. This t heory is, I t hink, in t he funct ionalist t radit ion of
Jam es and Dew ey, and is fused w it h t he holism of Wert heim er ( 19) ,
Goldst ein ( 6) , and Gest alt Psychology, and w it h t he dynam icism of
Freud ( 4) and Adler ( 1) . This fusion or synt hesis m ay arbit rarily be
called a 'general- dynam ic' t heory.
I t is far easier t o perceive and t o crit icize t he aspect s in m ot ivat ion
t heory t han t o rem edy t hem . Most ly t his is because of t he very serious
lack of sound dat a in t his area. I conceive t his lack of sound fact s t o be
due prim arily t o t he absence of a valid t heory of m ot ivat ion. The
present t heory t hen m ust be considered t o be a suggest ed program or
fram ework for fut ure research and m ust st and or fall, not so m uch on
fact s available or evidence present ed, as upon researches t o be done,
I I . TH E BASI C N EED S
Th e 'ph ysiologica l' n e e ds. - - The needs t hat are usually t aken as
t he st art ing point for m ot ivat ion t heory are t he so- called physiological
drives. Two recent lines of research m ake it necessary t o revise our
cust om ary not ions about t hese needs, first , t he developm ent of t he
concept of hom eost asis, and second, t he finding t hat appet it es
( preferent ial choices am ong foods) are a fairly efficient indicat ion of
act ual needs or lacks in t he body.
Hom eost asis refers t o t he body's aut om at ic effort s t o m aint ain a
const ant , norm al st at e of t he blood st ream . Cannon ( 2) has described
t his process for ( 1) t he w at er cont ent of t he blood, ( 2) salt cont ent ,
( 3) sugar cont ent , ( 4) prot ein cont ent , ( 5) fat cont ent , ( 6) calcium
cont ent , ( 7) oxygen cont ent , ( 8) const ant hydrogen- ion level (
acid-base balance) and ( 9) const ant t em perat ure of t he blood. Obviously
t his list can be ext ended t o include ot her m inerals, t he horm ones,
vit am ins, et c.
Young in a recent art icle ( 21) has sum m arized t he work on appet it e in
it s relat ion t o body needs. I f t he body lacks som e chem ical, t he
individual w ill t end t o develop a specific appet it e or part ial hunger for
t hat food elem ent .
Thus it seem s im possible as w ell as useless t o m ake any list of
fundam ent al physiological needs for t hey can com e t o alm ost any
num ber one m ight w ish, depending on t he degree of specificit y of
descript ion. We can not ident ify all physiological needs as hom eost at ic.
anim als, are hom eost at ic, has not yet been dem onst rat ed.
Furt herm ore, t his list w ould not include t he various sensory pleasures
( t ast es, sm ells, t ickling, st roking) w hich are probably physiological and
w hich m ay becom e t he goals of m ot ivat ed behavior.
I n a previous paper ( 13) it has been point ed out t hat t hese
physiological drives or needs are t o be considered unusual rat her t han
t ypical because t hey are isolable, and because t hey are localizable
som at ically. That is t o say, t hey are relat ively independent of each
ot her, of ot her m ot ivat ions and of t he organism as a whole, and
secondly, in m any cases, it is possible t o dem onst rat e a localized,
underlying som at ic base for t he drive. This is t rue less generally t han
has been t hought ( except ions are fat igue, sleepiness, m at ernal
responses) but it is st ill t rue in t he classic inst ances of hunger, sex,
and t hirst .
I t should be point ed out again t hat any of t he physiological needs and
t he consum m at ory behavior involved w it h t hem serve as channels for
all sort s of ot her needs as w ell. That is t o say, t he person w ho t hinks
he is hungry m ay act ually be seeking m ore for com fort , or
dependence, t han for vit am ins or prot eins. Conversely, it is possible t o
sat isfy t he hunger need in part by ot her act ivit ies such as drinking
wat er or sm oking cigaret t es. I n ot her words, relat ively isolable as
t hese physiological needs are, t hey are not com plet ely so.
Undoubt edly t hese physiological needs are t he m ost pre- pot ent of all
needs. What t his m eans specifically is, t hat in t he hum an being w ho is
m issing everyt hing in life in an ext rem e fashion, it is m ost likely t hat
ot hers. A person who is lacking food, safet y, love, and est eem w ould
m ost probably hunger for food m ore st rongly t han for anyt hing else.
I f all t he needs are unsat isfied, and t he organism is t hen dom inat ed by
t he physiological needs, all ot her needs m ay becom e sim ply
non-exist ent or be pushed int o t he background. I t is t hen fair t o
charact erize t he w hole organism by saying sim ply t hat it is hungry, for
consciousness is alm ost com plet ely preem pt ed by hunger. All
capacit ies are put int o t he service of hunger- sat isfact ion, and t he
organizat ion of t hese capacit ies is alm ost ent irely det erm ined by t he
one purpose of sat isfying hunger. The recept ors and effect ors, t he
int elligence, m em ory, habit s, all m ay now be defined sim ply as
hunger- grat ifying t ools. Capacit ies t hat are not useful for t his purpose
lie dorm ant , or are pushed int o t he background. The urge t o w rit e
poet ry, t he desire t o acquire an aut om obile, t he int erest in Am erican
hist ory, t he desire for a new pair of shoes ar e, in t he ext rem e case,
forgot t en or becom e of secondary im port ance. For t he m an who is
ext rem ely and dangerously hungry, no ot her int erest s exist but food.
He dream s food, he rem em bers food, he t hinks about food, he em ot es
only about food, he perceives only food and he w ant s only food. The
m ore subt le det erm inant s t hat ordinarily fuse wit h t he physiological
drives in organizing even feeding, drinking or sexual behavior, m ay
now be so com plet ely overw helm ed as t o allow us t o speak at t his t im e
( but only at t his t im e) of pure hunger drive and behavior, w it h t he one
unqualified aim of relief.
Anot her peculiar charact erist ic of t he hum an organism w hen it is
dom inat ed by a cert ain need is t hat t he w hole philosophy of t he fut ure
Ut opia can be defined very sim ply as a place w here t here is plent y of
food. He t ends t o t hink t hat , if only he is guarant eed food for t he rest
of his life, he w ill be perfect ly happy and will never want anyt hing
m ore. Life it self t ends t o be defined in t erm s of eat ing. Anyt hing else
w ill be defined as unim port ant . Freedom , love, com m unit y feeling,
respect , philosophy, m ay all be w aved aside as fripperies w hich are
useless since t hey fail t o fill t he st om ach. Such a m an m ay fairly be
said t o live by bread alone.
I t cannot possibly be denied t hat such t hings are t rue but t heir
generalit y can be denied. Em ergency condit ions are, alm ost by
definit ion, rare in t he norm ally funct ioning peaceful societ y. That t his
t ruism can be forgot t en is due m ainly t o t w o reasons. First , rat s have
few m ot ivat ions ot her t han physiological ones, and since so m uch of
t he research upon m ot ivat ion has been m ade wit h t hese anim als, it is
easy t o carry t he rat - pict ure over t o t he hum an being. Secondly, it is
t oo oft en not realized t hat cult ure it self is an adapt ive t ool, one of
whose m ain funct ions is t o m ake t he physiological em ergencies com e
less and less oft en. I n m ost of t he known societ ies, chronic ext rem e
hunger of t he em ergency t ype is rare, rat her t han com m on. I n any
case, t his is st ill t rue in t he Unit ed St at es. The average Am erican
cit izen is experiencing appet it e rat her t han hunger w hen he says " I am
hungry." He is apt t o experience sheer life- and- deat h hunger only by
accident and t hen only a few t im es t hrough his ent ire life.
Obviously a good way t o obscure t he 'higher' m ot ivat ions, and t o get a
lopsided view of hum an capacit ies and hum an nat ure, is t o m ake t he
organism ext rem ely and chronically hungry or t hirst y. Anyone w ho
w ill m easure all of m an's goals and desires by his behavior during
ext rem e physiological deprivat ion is cert ainly being blind t o m any
t hings. I t is quit e t rue t hat m an lives by bread alone - - w hen t here is
no bread. But w hat happens t o m an's desires w hen t here is plent y of
bread and w hen his belly is chronically filled?
At once ot her ( and 'higher') needs em erge and t hese, rat her t han
physiological hungers, dom inat e t he organism . And w hen t hese in t urn
are sat isfied, again new ( and st ill 'higher') needs em erge and so on.
This is what w e m ean by saying t hat t he basic hum an needs are
organized int o a hierarchy of relat ive prepot ency.
One m ain im plicat ion of t his phrasing is t hat grat ificat ion becom es as
im port ant a concept as deprivat ion in m ot ivat ion t heory, for it releases
t he organism from t he dom inat ion of a relat ively m ore physiological
need, perm it t ing t hereby t he em ergence of ot her m ore social goals.
The physiological needs, along w it h t heir part ial goals, w hen
chronically grat ified cease t o exist as act ive det erm inant s or organizers
of behavior. They now exist only in a pot ent ial fashion in t he sense
t hat t hey m ay em erge again t o dom inat e t he organism if t hey are
t hw art ed. But a w ant t hat is sat isfied is no longer a w ant . The
organism is dom inat ed and it s behavior organized only by unsat isfied
needs. I f hunger is sat isfied, it becom es unim port ant in t he current
dynam ics of t he individual.
This st at em ent is som ew hat qualified by a hypot hesis t o be discussed
m ore fully lat er, nam ely t hat it is precisely t hose individuals in whom a
cert ain need has alw ays been sat isfied w ho are best equipped t o
t hose w ho have been deprived in t he past w ill react different ly t o
current sat isfact ions t han t he one w ho has never been deprived.
Th e sa fe t y n e e ds. - - I f t he physiological needs are relat ively w ell
grat ified, t here t hen em erges a new set of needs, w hich w e m ay
cat egorize roughly as t he safet y needs. All t hat has been said of t he
physiological needs is equally t rue, alt hough in lesser degree, of t hese
desires. The organism m ay equally well be wholly dom inat ed by t hem .
They m ay serve as t he alm ost exclusive organizers of behavior,
recruit ing all t he capacit ies of t he organism in t heir service, and we
m ay t hen fairly describe t he whole organism as a safet y- seeking
m echanism . Again w e m ay say of t he recept ors, t he effect ors, of t he
int ellect and t he ot her capacit ies t hat t hey are prim arily safet y- seeking
t ools. Again, as in t he hungry m an, we find t hat t he dom inat ing goal is
a st rong det erm inant not only of his current w orld- out look and
philosophy but also of his philosophy of t he fut ure. Pract ically
everyt hing looks less im port ant t han safet y, ( even som et im es t he
physiological needs w hich being sat isfied, are now underest im at ed) . A
m an, in t his st at e, if it is ext rem e enough and chronic enough, m ay be
charact erized as living alm ost for safet y alone.
Alt hough in t his paper w e are int erest ed prim arily in t he needs of t he
adult , w e can approach an underst anding of his safet y needs perhaps
m ore efficient ly by observat ion of infant s and children, in w hom t hese
needs are m uch m ore sim ple and obvious. One reason for t he clearer
appearance of t he t hreat or danger react ion in infant s is t hat t hey do
not inhibit t his react ion at all, w hereas adult s in our societ y have been
t aught t o inhibit it at all cost s. Thus even w hen adult s do feel t heir
I nfant s w ill react in a t ot al fashion and as if t hey w ere endangered, if
t hey are dist urbed or dropped suddenly, st art led by loud noises,
flashing light , or ot her unusual sensory st im ulat ion, by rough handling,
by general loss of support in t he m ot her's arm s, or by inadequat e
support .[ 1]
I n infant s we can also see a m uch m ore direct react ion t o bodily
illnesses of various kinds. Som et im es t hese illnesses seem t o be
im m ediat ely and per se t hreat ening and seem t o m ake t he child feel
unsafe. For inst ance, vom it ing, colic or ot her sharp pains seem t o
m ake t he child look at t he w hole w orld in a different w ay. At such a
m om ent of pain, it m ay be post ulat ed t hat , for t he child, t he
appearance of t he w hole world suddenly changes from sunniness t o
darkness, so t o speak, and becom es a place in w hich anyt hing at all
m ight happen, in which previously st able t hings have suddenly becom e
unst able. Thus a child w ho because of som e bad food is t aken ill m ay,
for a day or t w o, develop fear, night m ares, and a need for prot ect ion
and reassurance never seen in him before his illness.
Anot her indicat ion of t he child's need for safet y is his preference for
som e kind of undisrupt ed rout ine or rhyt hm . He seem s t o want a
predict able, orderly w orld. For inst ance, inj ust ice, unfairness, or
inconsist ency in t he parent s seem s t o m ake a child feel anxious and
unsafe. This at t it ude m ay be not so m uch because of t he inj ust ice per
se or any part icular pains involved, but rat her because t his t reat m ent
t hreat ens t o m ake t he w orld look unreliable, or unsafe, or
unpredict able. Young children seem t o t hrive bet t er under a syst em
w hich has at least a skelet al out line of rigidit y, in w hich t here is a
count ed upon, not only for t he present but also far int o t he fut ure.
Perhaps one could express t his m ore accurat ely by saying t hat t he
child needs an organized w orld rat her t han an unorganized or
unst ruct ured one.
The cent ral role of t he parent s and t he norm al fam ily set up are
indisput able. Quarreling, physical assault , separat ion, divorce or deat h
w it hin t he fam ily m ay be part icularly t errifying. Also parent al out burst s
of rage or t hreat s of punishm ent direct ed t o t he child, calling him
nam es, speaking t o him harshly, shaking him , handling him roughly,
or act ual physical punishm ent som et im es elicit such t ot al panic and
t error in t he child t hat w e m ust assum e m ore is involved t han t he
physical pain alone. While it is t rue t hat in som e children t his t error
m ay represent also a fear of loss of parent al love, it can also occur in
com plet ely rej ect ed children, w ho seem t o cling t o t he hat ing parent s
m ore for sheer safet y and prot ect ion t han because of hope of love.
Confront ing t he average child w it h new , unfam iliar, st range,
unm anageable st im uli or sit uat ions will t oo frequent ly elicit t he danger
or t er ror r eact ion, as for exam ple, get t ing lost or even being separat ed
from t he parent s for a short t im e, being confront ed w it h new faces,
new sit uat ions or new t asks, t he sight of st range, unfam iliar or
uncont rollable obj ect s, illness or deat h. Part icularly at such t im es, t he
child's frant ic clinging t o his parent s is eloquent t est im ony t o t heir role
as prot ect ors ( quit e apart from t heir roles as food- givers and
love-givers) .
From t hese and sim ilar observat ions, w e m ay generalize and say t hat
predict able, organized w orld, w hich he can count , on, and in which
unexpect ed, unm anageable or ot her dangerous t hings do not happen,
and in which, in any case, he has all- powerful parent s who prot ect and
shield him from harm .
That t hese react ions m ay so easily be observed in children is in a w ay
a proof of t he fact t hat children in our societ y feel t oo unsafe ( or, in a
w ord, are badly brought up) . Children w ho are reared in an
unt hreat ening, loving fam ily do not ordinarily react as we have
described above ( 17) . I n such children t he danger react ions are apt t o
com e m ost ly t o obj ect s or sit uat ions t hat adult s t oo w ould consider
dangerous.[ 2]
The healt hy, norm al, fort unat e adult in our cult ure is largely sat isfied
in his safet y needs. The peaceful, sm oot hly running, 'good' societ y
ordinarily m akes it s m em bers feel safe enough from wild anim als,
ext rem es of t em perat ure, crim inals, assault and m urder, t yranny, et c.
Therefore, in a very real sense, he no longer has any safet y needs as
act ive m ot ivat ors. Just as a sat ed m an no longer feels hungry, a safe
m an no longer feels endangered. I f w e w ish t o see t hese needs
direct ly and clearly we m ust t urn t o neurot ic or near- neurot ic
individuals, and t o t he econom ic and social underdogs. I n bet w een
t hese ext rem es, w e can perceive t he expressions of safet y needs only
in such phenom ena as, for inst ance, t he com m on preference for a j ob
w it h t enure and prot ect ion, t he desire for a savings account , and for
insurance of various kinds ( m edical, dent al, unem ploym ent , disabilit y,
Ot her broader aspect s of t he at t em pt t o seek safet y and st abilit y in t he
w orld are seen in t he very com m on preference for fam iliar rat her t han
unfam iliar t hings, or for t he know n rat her t han t he unknown. The
t endency t o have som e religion or w orld- philosophy t hat organizes t he
universe and t he m en in it int o som e sort of sat isfact orily coherent ,
m eaningful w hole is also in part m ot ivat ed by safet y- seeking. Here t oo
w e m ay list science and philosophy in general as part ially m ot ivat ed by
t he safet y needs ( we shall see lat er t hat t here are also ot her
m ot ivat ions t o scient ific, philosophical or r eligious endeavor) .
Ot herwise t he need for safet y is seen as an act ive and dom inant
m obilizer of t he organism 's resources only in em ergencies, e. g., w ar,
disease, nat ural cat ast rophes, crim e waves, societ al disorganizat ion,
neurosis, brain inj ury, chronically bad sit uat ion.
Som e neurot ic adult s in our societ y ar e, in m any ways, like t he unsafe
child in t heir desire for safet y, alt hough in t he form er it t akes on a
som ew hat special appearance. Their react ion is oft en t o unknow n,
psychological dangers in a w orld t hat is perceived t o be host ile,
overw helm ing and t hreat ening. Such a person behaves as if a great
cat ast rophe were alm ost always im pending, i.e., he is usually
responding as if t o an em ergency. His safet y needs oft en find specific
expression in a search for a prot ect or , or a st ronger person on whom
he m ay depend, or perhaps, a Fuehrer.
The neurot ic individual m ay be described in a slight ly different w ay
w it h som e usefulness as a grow n- up person w ho ret ains his childish
at t it udes t ow ard t he w orld. That is t o say, a neurot ic adult m ay be said
m ot her's disapproval, or of being abandoned by his parent s, or having
his food t aken aw ay from him . I t is as if his childish at t it udes of fear
and t hreat react ion t o a dangerous w orld had gone underground, and
unt ouched by t he grow ing up and learning processes, w ere now ready
t o be called out by any st im ulus t hat w ould m ake a child feel
endangered and t hreat ened.[ 3]
The neurosis in w hich t he search for safet y t akes it s dearest form is in
t he com pulsive- obsessive neurosis. Com pulsive- obsessives t ry
frant ically t o order and st abilize t he w orld so t hat no unm anageable,
unexpect ed or unfam iliar dangers w ill ever appear ( 14) ; t hey hedge
t hem selves about w it h all sort s of cerem onials, rules and form ulas so
t hat every possible cont ingency m ay be provided for and so t hat no
new cont ingencies m ay appear. They are m uch like t he brain inj ured
cases, described by Goldst ein ( 6) , w ho m anage t o m aint ain t heir
equilibrium by avoiding everyt hing unfam iliar and st range and by
ordering t heir rest rict ed w orld in such a neat , disciplined, orderly
fashion t hat everyt hing in t he w orld can be count ed upon. They t ry t o
arrange t he world so t hat anyt hing unexpect ed ( dangers) cannot
possibly occur. I f, t hrough no fault of t heir ow n, som et hing unexpect ed
does occur, t hey go int o a panic react ion as if t his unexpect ed
occurrence const it ut ed a grave danger. What we can see only as a
none- t oo- st rong preference in t he healt hy person, e. g., preference for
t he fam iliar, becom es a life- and- deat h necessit y in abnorm al cases.
Th e love n e e ds. - - I f bot h t he physiological and t he safet y needs are
fairly w ell grat ified, t hen t here will em erge t he love and affect ion and
belongingness needs, and t he w hole cycle already described will repeat
before, t he absence of friends, or a sw eet heart , or a w ife, or children.
He will hunger for affect ionat e relat ions wit h people in general,
nam ely, for a place in his group, and he w ill st rive w it h great int ensit y
t o achieve t his goal. He w ill w ant t o at t ain such a place m ore t han
anyt hing else in t he w orld and m ay even forget t hat once, w hen he
w as hungry, he sneered at love.
I n our societ y t he t hw art ing of t hese needs is t he m ost com m only
found core in cases of m aladj ust m ent and m ore severe
psychopat hology. Love and affect ion, as w ell as t heir possible
expression in sexualit y, are generally looked upon wit h am bivalence
and are cust om arily hedged about wit h m any rest rict ions and
inhibit ions. Pract ically all t heorist s of psychopat hology have st ressed
t hwart ing of t he love needs as basic in t he pict ure of m aladj ust m ent .
Many clinical st udies have t herefore been m ade of t his need and w e
know m ore about it perhaps t han any of t he ot her needs except t he
physiological ones ( 14) .
One t hing t hat m ust be st ressed at t his point is t hat love is not
synonym ous w it h sex. Sex m ay be st udied as a purely physiological
need. Ordinarily sexual behavior is m ult i- det erm ined, t hat is t o say,
det erm ined not only by sexual but also by ot her needs, chief am ong
which are t he love and affect ion needs. Also not t o be overlooked is
t he fact t hat t he love needs involve bot h giving and receiving love.[ 4]
Th e e st e e m n e e ds. - - All people in our societ y ( w it h a few
pat hological except ions) have a need or desire for a st able, firm ly
based, ( usually) high evaluat ion of t hem selves, for self- respect , or
self-est eem , w e m ean t hat w hich is soundly based upon real capacit y,
achievem ent and respect from ot hers. These needs m ay be classified
int o t wo subsidiary set s. These are, first , t he desire for st rengt h, for
achievem ent , for adequacy, for confidence in t he face of t he w orld,
and for independence and freedom .[ 5] Secondly, w e have w hat w e
m ay call t he desire for reput at ion or prest ige ( defining it as respect or
est eem from ot her people) , recognit ion, at t ent ion, im port ance or
appreciat ion.[ 6] These needs have been relat ively st ressed by Alfred
Adler and his follow ers, and have been relat ively neglect ed by Freud
and t he psychoanalyst s. More and m ore t oday however t here is
appearing w idespread appreciat ion of t heir cent ral im port ance.
Sat isfact ion of t he est eem need leads t o feelings of
self-confidence, w ort h, st rengt h, capabilit y and adequacy of being useful
and necessary in t he w orld. But t hw art ing of t hese needs produces
feelings of inferiorit y, of weakness and of helplessness. These feelings
in t urn give rise t o eit her basic discouragem ent or else com pensat ory
or neurot ic t rends. An appreciat ion of t he necessit y of basic
self-confidence and an underst anding of how helpless people are w it hout it ,
can be easily gained from a st udy of severe t raum at ic neurosis ( 8) .[ 7]
Th e n e e d for se lf- a ct u a liz a t ion. - - Even if all t hese needs are
sat isfied, w e m ay st ill oft en ( if not alw ays) expect t hat a new
discont ent and rest lessness w ill soon develop, unless t he individual is
doing w hat he is fit t ed for. A m usician m ust m ake m usic, an art ist
m ust paint , a poet m ust writ e, if he is t o be ult im at ely happy. What a
This t erm , first coined by Kurt Goldst ein, is being used in t his paper in
a m uch m ore specific and lim it ed fashion. I t refers t o t he desire for
self- fulfillm ent , nam ely, t o t he t endency for him t o becom e act ualized
in w hat he is pot ent ially. This t endency m ight be phrased as t he desire
t o becom e m ore and m ore w hat one is, t o becom e ever yt hing t hat one
is capable of becom ing.
The specific form t hat t hese needs will t ake w ill of course vary great ly
from person t o per son. I n one individual it m ay t ake t he form of t he
desire t o be an ideal m ot her, in anot her it m ay be expressed
at hlet ically, and in st ill anot her it m ay be expressed in paint ing
pict ures or in invent ions. I t is not necessarily a creat ive urge alt hough
in people who have any capacit ies for creat ion it w ill t ake t his form .
The clear em ergence of t hese needs rest s upon prior sat isfact ion of t he
physiological, safet y, love and est eem needs. We shall call people who
are sat isfied in t hese needs, basically sat isfied people, and it is from
t hese t hat w e m ay expect t he fullest ( and healt hiest ) creat iveness.[ 8]
Since, in our societ y, basically sat isfied people are t he except ion, w e
do not know m uch about self- act ualizat ion, eit her experim ent ally or
clinically. I t rem ains a challenging problem for research.
Th e pr e con dit ion s for t h e ba sic n e e d sa t isfa ct ion s. - - There are
cert ain condit ions w hich are im m ediat e prerequisit es for t he basic
need sat isfact ions. Danger t o t hese is react ed t o alm ost as if it w ere a
direct danger t o t he basic needs t hem selves. Such condit ions as
freedom t o speak, freedom t o do w hat one w ishes so long as no harm
is done t o ot hers, freedom t o express one's self, freedom t o
j ust ice, fairness, honest y, orderliness in t he group are exam ples of
such precondit ions for basic need sat isfact ions. Thw art ing in t hese
freedom s w ill be react ed t o w it h a t hreat or em ergency response.
These condit ions are not ends in t hem selves but t hey are alm ost so
since t hey are so closely relat ed t o t he basic needs, w hich are
apparent ly t he only ends in t hem selves. These condit ions are defended
because w it hout t hem t he basic sat isfact ions are quit e im possible, or
at least , very severely endangered.
I f w e rem em ber t hat t he cognit ive capacit ies ( percept ual, int ellect ual,
learning) are a set of adj ust ive t ools, w hich have, am ong ot her
funct ions, t hat of sat isfact ion of our basic needs, t hen it is clear t hat
any danger t o t hem , any deprivat ion or blocking of t heir free use,
m ust also be indirect ly t hreat ening t o t he basic needs t hem selves.
Such a st at em ent is a part ial solut ion of t he general problem s of
curiosit y, t he search for know ledge, t rut h and w isdom , and t he
ever-persist ent urge t o solve t he cosm ic m yst eries.
We m ust t herefore int roduce anot her hypot hesis and speak of degrees
of closeness t o t he basic needs, for w e have already point ed out t hat
any conscious desires ( part ial goals) are m ore or less im port ant as
t hey are m ore or less close t o t he basic needs. The sam e st at em ent
m ay be m ade for various behavior act s. An act is psychologically
im port ant if it cont ribut es direct ly t o sat isfact ion of basic needs. The
less direct ly it so cont ribut es, or t he weaker t his cont ribut ion is, t he
less im port ant t his act m ust be conceived t o be from t he point of view
of dynam ic psychology. A sim ilar st at em ent m ay be m ade for t he
various defense or coping m echanism s. Som e are very direct ly relat ed
w eakly and dist ant ly relat ed. I ndeed if w e w ished, w e could speak of
m ore basic and less basic defense m echanism s, and t hen affirm t hat
danger t o t he m ore basic defenses is m ore t hreat ening t han danger t o
less basic defenses ( always rem em bering t hat t his is so only because
of t heir relat ionship t o t he basic needs) .
Th e de sir e s t o k n ow a n d t o u n de r st a n d. - - So far, w e have
m ent ioned t he cognit ive needs only in passing. Acquiring know ledge
and syst em at izing t he universe have been considered as, in part ,
t echniques for t he achievem ent of basic safet y in t he w orld, or, for t he
int elligent m an, expressions of self- act ualizat ion. Also freedom of
inquiry and expression have been discussed as precondit ions of
sat isfact ions of t he basic needs. True t hough t hese form ulat ions m ay
be, t hey do not const it ut e definit ive answ ers t o t he quest ion as t o t he
m ot ivat ion role of curiosit y, learning, philosophizing, experim ent ing,
et c. They are, at best , no m ore t han part ial answ ers.
This quest ion is especially difficult because we know so lit t le about t he
fact s. Curiosit y, explorat ion, desire for t he fact s, desire t o know m ay
cert ainly be observed easily enough. The fact t hat t hey oft en are
pursued even at great cost t o t he individual's safet y is an earnest of
t he part ial charact er of our previous discussion. I n addit ion, t he w rit er
m ust adm it t hat , t hough he has sufficient clinical evidence t o post ulat e
t he desire t o know as a very st rong drive in int elligent people, no dat a
are available for unint elligent people. I t m ay t hen be largely a funct ion
of relat ively high int elligence. Rat her t ent at ively, t hen, and largely in
t he hope of st im ulat ing discussion and research, we shall post ulat e a
basic desire t o know , t o be aw are of realit y, t o get t he fact s, t o sat isfy
This post ulat ion, however, is not enough. Even aft er w e know , w e are
im pelled t o know m ore and m ore m inut ely and m icroscopically on t he
one hand, and on t he ot her, m ore and m ore ext ensively in t he
direct ion of a w orld philosophy, religion, et c. The fact s t hat we acquire,
if t hey are isolat ed or at om ist ic, inevit ably get t heorized about , and
eit her analyzed or organized or bot h. This process has been phrased
by som e as t he search for 'm eaning.' We shall t hen post ulat e a desire
t o underst and, t o syst em at ize, t o or ganize, t o analyze, t o look for
relat ions and m eanings.
Once t hese desires are accept ed for discussion, we see t hat t hey t oo
form t hem selves int o a sm all hierarchy in which t he desire t o know is
prepot ent over t he desire t o underst and. All t he charact erist ics of a
hierarchy of prepot ency t hat w e have described above, seem t o hold
for t his one as well.
We m ust guard ourselves against t he t oo easy t endency t o separat e
t hese desires from t he basic needs we have discussed above, i.e., t o
m ake a sharp dichot om y bet w een 'cognit ive' and 'conat ive' needs. The
desire t o know and t o underst and are t hem selves conat ive, i.e., have a
st riving charact er, and are as m uch personalit y needs as t he 'basic
needs' we have already discussed ( 19) .
I I I . FURTH ER CH ARACTERI STI CS OF TH E BASI C N EED S
Th e de gr e e of fix it y of t he h ie r a r ch y of ba sic n e e ds. - - We have
spoken so far as if t his hierarchy were a fixed order but act ually it is
not nearly as rigid as w e m ay have im plied. I t is t rue t hat m ost of t he
needs in about t he order t hat has been indicat ed. However, t here have
been a num ber of except ions.
( 1) There are som e people in w hom , for inst ance, self- est eem seem s
t o be m ore im port ant t han love. This m ost com m on reversal in t he
hierarchy is usually due t o t he developm ent of t he not ion t hat t he
person w ho is m ost likely t o be loved is a st rong or pow erful person,
one who inspires respect or fear, and w ho is self confident or
aggressive. Therefore such people w ho lack love and seek it , m ay t ry
hard t o put on a front of aggressive, confident behavior. But
essent ially t hey seek high self- est eem and it s behavior expressions
m ore as a m eans- t o- an- end t han for it s ow n sake; t hey seek
self-assert ion for t he sake of love rat her t han for self- est eem it self.
( 2) There are ot her, apparent ly innat ely creat ive people in w hom t he
drive t o creat iveness seem s t o be m ore im port ant t han any ot her
count er- det erm inant . Their creat iveness m ight appear not as
self-act ualizat ion released by basic sat isfself-act ion, but in spit e of lack of basic
sat isfact ion.
( 3) I n cert ain people t he level of aspirat ion m ay be perm anent ly
deadened or low er ed. That is t o say, t he less pre- pot ent goals m ay
sim ply be lost , and m ay disappear forever, so t hat t he person w ho has
experienced life at a very low level, i. e., chronic unem ploym ent , m ay
cont inue t o be sat isfied for t he rest of his life if only he can get enough
food.
( 4) The so- called 'psychopat hic personalit y' is anot her exam ple of
t he best dat a available ( 9) , have been st arved for love in t he earliest
m ont hs of t heir lives and have sim ply lost forever t he desire and t he
abilit y t o give and t o receive affect ion ( as anim als lose sucking or
pecking reflexes t hat are not exercised soon enough aft er birt h) .
( 5) Anot her cause of reversal of t he hierarchy is t hat w hen a need has
been sat isfied for a long t im e, t his need m ay be underevaluat ed.
People who have never experienced chronic hunger are apt t o
underest im at e it s effect s and t o look upon food as a r at her
unim port ant t hing. I f t hey are dom inat ed by a higher need, t his higher
need w ill seem t o be t he m ost im port ant of all. I t t hen becom es
possible, and indeed does act ually happen, t hat t hey m ay, for t he sake
of t his higher need, put t hem selves int o t he posit ion of being deprived
in a m ore basic need. We m ay expect t hat aft er a long- t im e
deprivat ion of t he m ore basic need t here w ill be a t endency t o
reevaluat e bot h needs so t hat t he m ore pre- pot ent need w ill act ually
becom e consciously prepot ent for t he individual w ho m ay have given it
up very light ly. Thus, a m an w ho has given up his j ob rat her t han lose
his self- respect , and w ho t hen st arves for six m ont hs or so, m ay be
w illing t o t ake his j ob back even at t he price of losing his a
self-respect .
( 6) Anot her part ial explanat ion of apparent reversals is seen in t he fact
t hat w e have been t alking about t he hierarchy of prepot ency in t erm s
of consciously felt want s or desires rat her t han of behavior. Looking at
behavior it self m ay give us t he w rong im pression. What w e have
claim ed is t hat t he person w ill w ant t he m ore basic of t w o needs when
act upon his desires. Let us say again t hat t here are m any
det erm inant s of behavior ot her t han t he needs and desires.
( 7) Perhaps m ore im port ant t han all t hese except ions are t he ones
t hat involve ideals, high social st andards, high values and t he like.
Wit h such values people becom e m art yrs; t hey give up everyt hing for
t he sake of a part icular ideal, or value. These people m ay be
underst ood, at least in part , by reference t o one basic concept ( or
hypot hesis) w hich m ay be called 'increased frust rat ion- t olerance
t hrough early grat ificat ion'. People who have been sat isfied in t heir
basic needs t hroughout t heir lives, part icularly in t heir earlier years,
seem t o develop except ional pow er t o w it hst and present or fut ure
t hw art ing of t hese needs sim ply because t hey have st rong, healt hy
charact er st ruct ure as a result of basic sat isfact ion. They are t he
'st rong' people w ho can easily w eat her disagreem ent or opposit ion,
w ho can sw im against t he st ream of public opinion and w ho can st and
up for t he t rut h at great personal cost . I t is j ust t he ones who have
loved and been w ell loved, and w ho have had m any deep friendships
w ho can hold out against hat red, rej ect ion or persecut ion.
I say all t his in spit e of t he fact t hat t here is a cert ain am ount of sheer
habit uat ion w hich is also involved in any full discussion of frust rat ion
t olerance. For inst ance, it is likely t hat t hose persons who have been
accust om ed t o relat ive st arvat ion for a long t im e, are part ially enabled
t hereby t o w it hst and food deprivat ion. What sort of balance m ust be
m ade bet ween t hese t w o t endencies, of habit uat ion on t he one hand,
and of past sat isfact ion breeding present frust rat ion t olerance on t he
ot her hand, rem ains t o be w orked out by furt her research. Meanw hile
do not cont radict each ot her, in respect t o t his phenom enon of
increased frust rat ion t olerance, it seem s probable t hat t he m ost
im port ant grat ificat ions com e in t he first t w o years of life. That is t o
say, people w ho have been m ade secure and st rong in t he earliest
years, t end t o rem ain secure and st rong t hereaft er in t he face of
w hat ever t hreat ens.
D e gr e e of r e la t ive sa t isfa ct ion. - - So far, our t heoret ical discussion
m ay have given t he im pression t hat t hese five set s of needs are
som ehow in a st ep- w ise, all- or- none relat ionships t o each ot her. We
have spoken in such t erm s as t he follow ing: " I f one need is sat isfied,
t hen anot her em erges." This st at em ent m ight give t he false
im pression t hat a need m ust be sat isfied 100 per cent before t he next
need em erges. I n act ual fact , m ost m em bers of our societ y who are
norm al, are part ially sat isfied in all t heir basic needs and part ially
unsat isfied in all t heir basic needs at t he sam e t im e. A m ore realist ic
descript ion of t he hierarchy would be in t erm s of decreasing
percent ages of sat isfact ion as we go up t he hierarchy of prepot ency,
For inst ance, if I m ay assign arbit rary figures for t he sake of
illust rat ion, it is as if t he average cit izen is sat isfied perhaps 85 per
cent in his physiological needs, 70 per cent in his safet y needs, 50 per
cent in his love needs, 40 per cent in his self- est eem needs, and 10
per cent in his self- act ualizat ion needs.
As for t he concept of em ergence of a new need aft er sat isfact ion of t he
prepot ent need, t his em ergence is not a sudden, salt at ory
phenom enon but rat her a gradual em ergence by slow degrees from
not hingness. For inst ance, if prepot ent need A is sat isfied only 10 per
becom es sat isfied 25 per cent , need B m ay em erge 5 per cent , as
need A becom es sat isfied 75 per cent need B m ay em erge go per cent ,
and so on.
Un con sciou s ch a r a ct e r of n e e ds. - - These needs are neit her
necessarily conscious nor unconscious. On t he w hole, how ever, in t he
average person, t hey are m ore oft en unconscious rat her t han
conscious. I t is not necessary at t his point t o overhaul t he t rem endous
m ass of evidence w hich indicat es t he crucial im port ance of
unconscious m ot ivat ion. I t w ould by now be expect ed, on a priori
grounds alone, t hat unconscious m ot ivat ions w ould on t he w hole be
rat her m ore im port ant t han t he conscious m ot ivat ions. What we have
called t he basic needs are very oft en largely unconscious alt hough
t hey m ay, w it h suit able t echniques, and w it h sophist icat ed people
becom e conscious.
Cu lt u r a l spe cificit y a n d ge n e r a lit y of n e e ds. - - This classificat ion
of basic needs m akes som e at t em pt t o t ake account of t he relat ive
unit y behind t he superficial differences in specific desires from one
cult ure t o anot her. Cert ainly in any part icular cult ure an individual's
conscious m ot ivat ional cont ent w ill usually be ext rem ely different from
t he conscious m ot ivat ional cont ent of an individual in anot her societ y.
However, it is t he com m on experience of ant hropologist s t hat people,
even in different societ ies, are m uch m ore alike t han w e w ould t hink
from our first cont act w it h t hem , and t hat as w e know t hem bet t er w e
seem t o find m ore and m ore of t his com m onness, We t hen recognize
t he m ost st art ling differences t o be superficial rat her t han basic, e. g.,
differences in st yle of hair- dress, clot hes, t ast es in food, et c. Our
unit y behind t he apparent diversit y from cult ure t o cult ure. No claim is
m ade t hat it is ult im at e or universal for all cult ures. The claim is m ade
only t hat it is relat ively m ore ult im at e, m ore universal, m ore basic,
t han t he superficial conscious desires from cult ure t o cult ure, and
m akes a som ew hat closer approach t o com m on- hum an charact erist ics,
Basic needs are m ore com m on- hum an t han superficial desires or
behaviors.
M u lt iple m ot iva t ion s of be h a vior. - - These needs m ust be
underst ood not t o be exclusive or single det erm iners of cert ain kinds
of behavior. An exam ple m ay be found in any behavior t hat seem s t o
be physiologically m ot ivat ed, such as eat ing, or sexual play or t he like.
The clinical psychologist s have long since found t hat any behavior m ay
be a channel t hrough which flow various det erm inant s. Or t o say it in
anot her w ay, m ost behavior is m ult i- m ot ivat ed. Wit hin t he sphere of
m ot ivat ional det erm inant s any behavior t ends t o be det erm ined by
several or all of t he basic needs sim ult aneously rat her t han by only
one of t hem . The lat t er w ould be m ore an except ion t han t he form er.
Eat ing m ay be part ially for t he sake of filling t he st om ach, and part ially
for t he sake of com fort and am eliorat ion of ot her needs. One m ay
m ake love not only for pure sexual release, but also t o convince one's
self of one's m asculinit y, or t o m ake a conquest , t o feel powerful, or t o
w in m ore basic affect ion. As an illust rat ion, I m ay point out t hat it
w ould be possible ( t heoret ically if not pract ically) t o analyze a single
act of an individual and see in it t he expression of his physiological
needs, his safet y needs, his love needs, his est eem needs and
self-act ualizat ion. This cont rast s sharply w it h t he m ore naive brand of t rait
of act , i.e., an aggressive act is t raced solely t o a t rait of
aggressiveness.
M u lt iple de t e r m in a n t s of be h a vior. - - Not all behavior is
det erm ined by t he basic needs. We m ight even say t hat not all
behavior is m ot ivat ed. There are m any det erm inant s of behavior ot her
t han m ot ives.[ 9] For inst ance, one ot her im port ant class of
det erm inant s is t he so- called 'field' det erm inant s. Theoret ically, at
least , behavior m ay be det erm ined com plet ely by t he field, or even by
specific isolat ed ext ernal st im uli, as in associat ion of ideas, or cert ain
condit ioned reflexes. I f in response t o t he st im ulus w ord 't able' I
im m ediat ely perceive a m em ory im age of a t able, t his response
cert ainly has not hing t o do wit h m y basic needs.
Secondly, w e m ay call at t ent ion again t o t he concept of 'degree of
closeness t o t he basic needs' or 'degree of m ot ivat ion.' Som e behavior
is highly m ot ivat ed; ot her behavior is only w eakly m ot ivat ed. Som e is
not m ot ivat ed at all ( but all behavior is det erm ined) .
Anot her im port ant point [ 10] is t hat t here is a basic difference
bet w een expressive behavior and coping behavior ( funct ional st riving,
purposive goal seeking) . An expressive behavior does not t ry t o do
anyt hing; it is sim ply a reflect ion of t he personalit y. A st upid m an
behaves st upidly, not because he w ant s t o, or t ries t o, or is m ot ivat ed
t o, but sim ply because he is w hat he is. The sam e is t rue w hen I speak
in a bass voice rat her t han t enor or soprano. The random m ovem ent s
of a healt hy child, t he sm ile on t he face of a happy m an even w hen he
is alone, t he springiness of t he healt hy m an's w alk, and t he erect ness
behavior. Also t he st yle in which a m an carries out alm ost all his
behavior, m ot ivat ed as w ell as unm ot ivat ed, is oft en expressive.
We m ay t hen ask, is all behavior expressive or reflect ive of t he
charact er st ruct ure? The answ er is 'No.' Rot e, habit ual, aut om at ized,
or convent ional behavior m ay or m ay not be expressive. The sam e is
t rue for m ost 'st im ulus- bound' behaviors. I t is finally necessary t o
st ress t hat expressiveness of behavior, and goal- direct edness of
behavior are not m ut ually exclusive cat egories. Average behavior is
usually bot h.
Goa ls a s ce n t e r in g pr in ciple in m ot iva t ion t h e or y. - - I t w ill be
observed t hat t he basic principle in our classificat ion has been neit her
t he inst igat ion nor t he m ot ivat ed behavior but rat her t he funct ions,
effect s, purposes, or goals of t he behavior. I t has been proven
sufficient ly by various people t hat t his is t he m ost suit able point for
cent ering in any m ot ivat ion t heory.[ 11]
An im a l a n d h u m a n ce n t e r in g. - - This t heory st art s w it h t he hum an
being rat her t han any lower and presum ably 'sim pler' anim al. Too
m any of t he findings t hat have been m ade in anim als have been
proven t o be t rue for anim als but not for t he hum an being. There is no
reason w hat soever w hy w e should st art w it h anim als in order t o st udy
hum an m ot ivat ion. The logic or rat her illogic behind t his general fallacy
of 'pseudo- sim plicit y' has been exposed oft en enough by philosophers
and logicians as w ell as by scient ist s in each of t he various fields. I t is
no m ore necessary t o st udy anim als before one can st udy m an t han it
is t o st udy m at hem at ics before one can st udy geology or psychology
We m ay also rej ect t he old, naive, behaviorism w hich assum ed t hat it
was som ehow necessary, or at least m ore 'scient ific' t o j udge hum an
beings by anim al st andards. One consequence of t his belief w as t hat
t he w hole not ion of purpose and goal was excluded from m ot ivat ional
psychology sim ply because one could not ask a w hit e rat about his
purposes. Tolm an ( 18) has long since proven in anim al st udies
t hem selves t hat t his exclusion w as not necessary.
M ot iva t ion a n d t h e t h e or y of psych opa t h oge n e sis. - - The
conscious m ot ivat ional cont ent of everyday life has, according t o t he
foregoing, been conceived t o be relat ively im port ant or unim port ant
accordingly as it is m ore or less closely relat ed t o t he basic goals. A
desire for an ice cream cone m ight act ually be an indirect expression
of a desire for love. I f it is, t hen t his desire for t he ice cream cone
becom es ext rem ely im port ant m ot ivat ion. I f how ever t he ice cream is
sim ply som et hing t o cool t he m out h wit h, or a casual appet it ive
react ion, t hen t he desire is relat ively unim port ant . Everyday conscious
desires are t o be regarded as sym pt om s, as surface indicat ors of m ore
basic needs. I f w e w ere t o t ake t hese superficial desires at t heir face
value m e w ould find ourselves in a st at e of com plet e confusion w hich
could never be resolved, since w e w ould be dealing seriously w it h
sym pt om s rat her t han w it h w hat lay behind t he sym pt om s.
Thw art ing of unim port ant desires produces no psychopat hological
result s; t hwart ing of a basically im port ant need does produce such
result s. Any t heory of psychopat hogenesis m ust t hen be based on a
sound t heory of m ot ivat ion. A conflict or a frust rat ion is not necessarily
pat hogenic. I t becom es so only w hen it t hreat ens or t hw art s t he basic
Th e r ole of gr a t ifie d n e e ds. - - I t has been point ed out above several
t im es t hat our needs usually em erge only w hen m ore prepot ent needs
have been grat ified. Thus grat ificat ion has an im port ant role in
m ot ivat ion t heory. Apart from t his, however, needs cease t o play an
act ive det erm ining or organizing role as soon as t hey are grat ified.
What t his m eans is t hat , e. g., a basically sat isfied person no longer
has t he needs for est eem , love, safet y, et c. The only sense in w hich he
m ight be said t o have t hem is in t he alm ost m et aphysical sense t hat a
sat ed m an has hunger, or a filled bot t le has em pt iness. I f we are
int erest ed in w hat act ually m ot ivat es us, and not in w hat has, w ill, or
m ight m ot ivat e us, t hen a sat isfied need is not a m ot ivat or. I t m ust be
considered for all pract ical purposes sim ply not t o exist , t o have
disappeared. This point should be em phasized because it has been
eit her overlooked or cont radict ed in every t heory of m ot ivat ion I
know .[ 12] The perfect ly healt hy, norm al, fort unat e m an has no sex
needs or hunger needs, or needs for safet y, or for love, or for prest ige,
or self- est eem , except in st ray m om ent s of quickly passing t hreat . I f
w e w ere t o say ot herw ise, w e should also have t o aver t hat every m an
had all t he pat hological reflexes, e. g., Babinski, et c., because if his
nervous syst em w ere dam aged, t hese w ould appear.
I t is such considerat ions as t hese t hat suggest t he bold post ulat ion
t hat a m an w ho is t hw art ed in any of his basic needs m ay fairly be
envisaged sim ply as a sick m an. This is a fair parallel t o our
designat ion as 'sick' of t he m an who lacks vit am ins or m inerals. Who is
t o say t hat a lack of love is less im port ant t han a lack of vit am ins?
Since w e know t he pat hogenic effect s of love st arvat ion, who is t o say
w ay, any m ore t han t he physician does w ho diagnoses and t reat s
pellagra or scurvy? I f I were perm it t ed t his usage, I should t hen say
sim ply t hat a healt hy m an is prim arily m ot ivat ed by his needs t o
develop and act ualize his fullest pot ent ialit ies and capacit ies. I f a m an
has any ot her basic needs in any act ive, chronic sense, t hen he is
sim ply an unhealt hy m an. He is as surely sick as if he had suddenly
developed a st rong salt - hunger or calcium hunger.[ 13]
I f t his st at em ent seem s unusual or paradoxical t he reader m ay be
assured t hat t his is only one am ong m any such paradoxes t hat w ill
appear as we revise our ways of looking at m an's deeper m ot ivat ions.
When w e ask w hat m an w ant s of life, we deal wit h his very essence.
I V. SUM M ARY
( 1) There are at least five set s of goals, w hich w e m ay call basic
needs. These are briefly physiological, safet y, love, 'est eem , and
self-act ualizat ion. I n addit ion, we are m ot ivat ed by t he desire t o achieve or
m aint ain t he various condit ions upon which t hese basic sat isfact ions
rest and by cert ain m ore int ellect ual desires.
( 2) These basic goals are relat ed t o each ot her, being arranged in a
hierarchy of prepot ency. This m eans t hat t he m ost prepot ent goal w ill
m onopolize consciousness and w ill t end of it self t o organize t he
recruit m ent of t he various capacit ies of t he organism . The less
prepot ent needs are m inim ized, even forgot t en or denied. But w hen a
need is fairly well sat isfied, t he next prepot ent ( 'higher') need
cent er of organizat ion of behavior, since grat ified needs are not act ive
m ot ivat ors.
Thus m an is a perpet ually w ant ing anim al. Ordinarily t he sat isfact ion
of t hese want s is not alt oget her m ut ually exclusive, but only t ends t o
be. The average m em ber of our societ y is m ost oft en part ially sat isfied
and part ially unsat isfied in all of his w ant s. The hierarchy principle is
usually em pirically observed in t erm s of increasing percent ages of
non-sat isfact ion as w e go up t he hierarchy. Reversals of t he average order
of t he hierarchy are som et im es observed. Also it has been observed
t hat an individual m ay perm anent ly lose t he higher want s in t he
hierarchy under special condit ions. There are not only ordinarily
m ult iple m ot ivat ions for usual behavior, but in addit ion m any
det erm inant s ot her t han m ot ives.
( 3) Any t hw art ing or possibilit y of t hw art ing of t hese basic hum an
goals, or danger t o t he defenses w hich prot ect t hem , or t o t he
condit ions upon w hich t hey rest , is considered t o be a psychological
t hreat . Wit h a few except ions, all psychopat hology m ay be part ially
t raced t o such t hreat s. A basically t hw art ed m an m ay act ually be
defined as a 'sick' m an, if w e w ish.
( 4) I t is such basic t hreat s w hich bring about t he general em ergency
react ions.
( 5) Cert ain ot her basic problem s have not been dealt w it h because of
lim it at ions of space. Am ong t hese are ( a) t he problem of values in any
definit ive m ot ivat ion t heory, ( b) t he relat ion bet w een appet it es,
t he basic needs and t heir possible derivat ion in early childhood, ( d)
redefinit ion of m ot ivat ional concept s, i.e., drive, desire, w ish, need,
goal, ( e) im plicat ion of our t heory for hedonist ic t heory, ( f) t he nat ure
of t he uncom plet ed act , of success and failure, and of aspirat ion- level,
( g) t he role of associat ion, habit and condit ioning, ( h) relat ion t o t he
t heory of int er- personal relat ions, ( i) im plicat ions for psychot herapy,
( j ) im plicat ion for t heory of societ y, ( k) t he t heory of selfishness, ( l)
t he relat ion bet w een needs and cult ural pat t erns, ( m ) t he relat ion
bet w een t his t heory and Alport 's t heory of funct ional aut onom y. These
as w ell as cert ain ot her less im port ant quest ions m ust be considered
N ot e s
[ 1] As t he child grow s up, sheer know ledge and fam iliarit y as w ell as
bet t er m ot or developm ent m ake t hese 'dangers' less and less
dangerous and m ore and m ore m anageable. Throughout life it m ay be
said t hat one of t he m ain conat ive funct ions of educat ion is t his
neut ralizing of apparent dangers t hrough knowledge, e. g., I am not
afraid of t hunder because I know som et hing about it .
[ 2] A 't est bat t ery' for safet y m ight be confront ing t he child w it h a
sm all exploding firecracker, or w it h a bew hiskered face; having t he
m ot her leave t he room , put t ing him upon a high ladder, a hypoderm ic
inj ect ion, having a m ouse craw l up t o him , et c. Of course I cannot
seriously recom m end t he deliberat e use of such 't est s' for t hey m ight
very w ell harm t he child being t est ed. But t hese and sim ilar sit uat ions
com e up by t he score in t he child's ordinary day- t o- day living and m ay
be observed. There is no reason why t hose st im uli should not be used
w it h, far exam ple, young chim panzees.
[ 3] Not all neurot ic individuals feel unsafe. Neurosis m ay have at it s
core a t hw art ing of t he affect ion and est eem needs in a person w ho is
generally safe.
[ 4] For furt her det ails see ( 12) and ( 16, Chap. 5) .
[ 5] Whet her or not t his part icular desire is universal w e do not know .
The crucial quest ion, especially im port ant t oday, is " Will m en w ho are
enslaved and dom inat ed inevit ably feel dissat isfied and rebellious?" We
w ho has know n t rue freedom ( not paid for by giving up safet y and
securit y but rat her built on t he basis of adequat e safet y and securit y)
w ill not w illingly or easily allow his freedom t o be t aken aw ay from
him . But w e do not know t hat t his is t rue for t he person born int o
slavery. The event s of t he next decade should give us our answ er. See
discussion of t his problem in ( 5) .
[ 6] Perhaps t he desire for prest ige and respect from ot hers is
subsidiary t o t he desire for self- est eem or confidence in oneself.
Observat ion of children seem s t o indicat e t hat t his is so, but clinical
dat a give no clear support for such a conclusion.
[ 7] For m ore ext ensive discussion of norm al self- est eem , as w ell as for
report s of various researches, see ( 11) .
[ 8] Clearly creat ive behavior, like paint ing, is like any ot her behavior
in having m ult iple, det erm inant s. I t m ay be seen in 'innat ely creat ive'
people whet her t hey are sat isfied or not , happy or unhappy, hungry or
sat ed. Also it is clear t hat creat ive act ivit y m ay be com pensat ory,
am eliorat ive or purely econom ic. I t is m y im pression ( as yet
unconfirm ed) t hat it is possible t o dist inguish t he art ist ic and
int ellect ual product s of basically sat isfied people from t hose of
basically unsat isfied people by inspect ion alone. I n any case, here t oo
w e m ust dist inguish, in a dynam ic fashion, t he overt behavior it self
from it s various m ot ivat ions or purposes.
[ 9] I am aware t hat m any psychologist s and psychoanalyst s use t he
consider t his an obfuscat ing usage. Sharp dist inct ions are necessary
for clarit y of t hought , and precision in experim ent at ion.
[ 10] To be discussed fully in a subsequent publicat ion.
[ 11] The int erest ed reader is referred t o t he very excellent discussion
of t his point in Murray's Explorat ions in Personalit y ( 15) .
[ 12] Not e t hat accept ance of t his t heory necessit at es basic revision of
t he Freudian t heory.
[ 13] I f w e w ere t o use t he w ord 'sick' in t his way, w e should t hen also
have t o face squarely t he relat ions of m an t o his societ y. One clear
im plicat ion of our definit ion w ould be t hat ( 1) since a m an is t o be
called sick w ho is basically t hw art ed, and ( 2) since such basic
t hwart ing is m ade possible ult im at ely only by forces out side t he
individual, t hen ( 3) sickness in t he individual m ust com e ult im at ely
from sickness in t he societ y. The 'good' or healt hy societ y would t hen
be defined as one t hat perm it t ed m an's highest purposes t o em erge by
sat isfying all his prepot ent basic needs.
Re fe r e n ce s
1. ADLER, A. Social int erest . London: Faber & Faber , 1938.
2. CANNON, W. B. Wisdom of t he body. New York: Nort on, 1932.
3. FREUD, A. The ego and t he m echanism s of defense. London: Hogart h,
1937.
4. FREUD, S. New int roduct ory lect ures on psychoanalysis. New York:
Nort on, 1933.
5. FROMM, E. Escape from fr eedom . New York: Far rar and Rinehart , 1941.
6. GOLDSTEI N, K. The organism . New York: Am erican Book Co., 1939.
7. HORNEY, K. The neurot ic personalit y of our t im e. New Yor k: Nort on, 1937.
8. KARDI NER, A. The t raum at ic neuroses of w ar . New Yor k: Hoeber , 1941.
9. LEVY, D. M. Prim ary affect hunger. Am er. J. Psychiat ., 1937, 94,
643-652.
10. MASLOW, A. H. Conflict , frust rat ion, and t he t heory of t hr eat . J. abnorm .
( soc.) Psychol., 1943, 38, 81- 86.
11. MASLOW, A. H. Dom inance, personalit y and social behavior in w om en. J.
soc. Psychol., 1939, 10, 3- 39.
12. MASLOW, A. H. The dynam ics of psychological securit y- insecurit y.
13. MASLOW, A. H. A preface t o m ot ivat ion t heory. Psychosom at ic Med.,
1943, 5, 85- 92.
14. MASLOW, A. H. & MI TTLEMANN, B. Principles of abnorm al psychology.
New Yor k: Har per & Br os., 1941.
15. MURRAY, H. A., et al. Explorat ions in Personalit y. New York: Oxford
Univer sit y Press, 1938.
16. PLANT, J. Personalit y and t he cult ural pat t ern. New York: Com m onwealt h
Fund, 1937.
17. SHI RLEY, M. Children's adj ust m ent s t o a st range sit uat ion. J. abrnor m .
( soc.) Psychol., 1942, 37, 201- 217.
18. TOLMAN, E. C. Purposive behavior in anim als and m en. New York:
Cent ur y, 1932.
19. WERTHEI MER, M. Unpublished lect ures at t he New School for Social
Research.
20. YOUNG, P. T. Mot ivat ion of behavior. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
1936.
21. YOUNG, P. T. The experim ent al analysis of appet it e. Psychol. Bull., 1941,
Writ t en and regularly updat ed by a lect urer in psychology, t his w ebsit e is designed t o help anybody looking for inform ed and det ailed inform at ion on psychology.
Definit ions, hist ory, t opic areas, t heory and pract ice, careers, debat es, course direct ories and st udy skills w ill all be covered in det ail. The websit e also highlight s and explores t he m ost fascinat ing and com pelling psychology relat ed news and research.
w ww .all- about - psychology.com
I w ill be using Tw it t er t o keep people up- t o- dat e w it h all t he lat est developm ent s on t he All About Psychology Websit e, including when new psychology eBooks are m ade available for free download.
ht t p: / / t w it t er.com / psych101
I n t e r e st e d I n For e n sic Psych ology?
What is forensic psychology? Crim inal profiling, t he st udy and pract ice of forensic psychology. These are j ust som e of t he m any t opics on offer at t his free and com prehensive websit e.
I n t e r e st e d I n For e n sic Scie n ce ?
Very popular websit e t hat provides a free & com prehensive guide t o t he world of forensic science.
www.all- about - forensic- science.com /
