Talk:Incentive theory

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article contains broken links to one or more target anchors:

[[Motivation#Incentive theory]] The anchor (#Incentive theory) has been deleted by other users before.

The anchors may have been removed, renamed, or are no longer valid. Please fix them by following the link above, checking the page history of the target pages, or updating the links.

Remove this template after the problem is fixed | Report an error

Untitled

can someone please add some more details on this article. I have an essay due on the 11th of november and i'm doing my research on this theory...please

yours faithfully mukovhe

Hmm, I must first warn from using Wikipedia as a source for research, otherwise than as a starting point for finding primary sources on the web. We're doing our best here on WP, but we're a bunch of amateurs that sometimes have a shallow insight in science and reality. Secondly, the incentive theory within psychology is not more than 15 years old or less, there's not much to be found yet. Said: Rursus ☻ 10:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Split

I'm considering a split into "Incentive theory (organization)", and "Incentive theory (psychology)", since the theories seems to be unrelated - as far as I can see now. However, I don't know yet - they may actually be the same genre - it would be logical if they were. Said: Rursus ☻ 10:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I decided a split might be relevant, since the theories, however connected, regards organization structures from a non-motivation stand point on the organizational side, and motivations connected to drive and beliefs on the psychological side. What might be relevant as an alternative to a split, would be to integrate the sparse material into other articles, and here have just one disambiguation page. Opinions? Said: Rursus ☻ 10:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A split is highly necessary... As I will add more to the Psychology section the economic section will seem more and more irrelevant and confusing. There definately should be disambiguation for the search term "Incentive theory".--Nonymous-raz (talk) 21:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes these should be splut —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.189.160.137 (talk) 03:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think a split would not necessarily be useful as the term incentive (something that causes a change in behaviour) has both an economic and a behavioural usage (which suggests a split would be useful) but both meanings are effectively the same - but it would be useful if this page was linked to the subject of motivation, anxiety, arousal, behavioural psychology and many others —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheSilentTraveller (talk • contribs) 16:52, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Split done. SilkTork *^YES! 19:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]