Why Incentives Work for Adults and Teens Alike

Every teacher knows the diversity of motivation in a classroom. Some students genuinely love the subject matter and will engage no matter what. Others respond best to clear structure and the promise of recognition or reward. The same is true for adults, some people are driven by passion for their craft, while others stay in jobs primarily because the paycheck keeps life moving.

Neither group is “wrong.” It is simply that most of us, students and adults alike, balance a mix of intrinsic and extrinsic drivers. And when intrinsic drive is not enough, incentives become the bridge that gets us moving.

The Adult Parallel

Most adults work for a paycheck. The paycheck is not always exciting, but it is clear, reliable, and tied directly to effort. If tomorrow your boss said, “Work hard today for the sake of your future self, you will be glad in ten years”, motivation would evaporate. Yet this is exactly the pitch students hear when told to “do your homework so you can get into university or land a good job someday”.

The Classroom Reality

Teens, like adults, work best when incentives are tangible and near term. But if we do not provide constructive ones, students invent their own.

Take the student who cracks a joke every time you ask a serious question. From a teacher’s perspective, it is disruption. From the student’s perspective, it is status economics, a single witty remark can earn immediate laughter and recognition from peers, a currency more valuable in that moment than a future grade. In their calculation, blurting out wins the better “paycheck”.

Or consider the student who races through tasks at lightning speed, handing in incomplete or sloppy work just to be the first finished. To the teacher, it looks careless. To the student, though, there is a powerful payoff, admiration from peers for being “fast” and the bonus of free time at the end. Again, the incentive is peer recognition and immediate freedom, more rewarding than careful work whose benefits are delayed.

Research Insight, Expectancy Value Theory

Psychologists Jacquelynne Eccles and Allan Wigfield describe motivation as a mix of expectancy (do I think I can succeed?) and value (is it worth it to me?). When value is defined by peer laughs or recognition, students will “invest” in those behaviors. This is not laziness, it is a rational response to the incentives available.

A similar pattern shows up in token economy studies, when students received points or tokens tied directly to on task behavior, engagement rose sharply. Not because students suddenly cared more about maths, but because the value equation shifted. Tokens made effort feel worth it.

A Relatable Case

Picture a Year 9 student, “Sam”. Sam rarely completes work on time, yet never misses an opportunity to disrupt. He thrives on the moment when his peers laugh at his commentary. From his perspective, he is not avoiding work, he is choosing the reward system that pays faster and louder. Without an alternative incentive structure, his choice is rational.

And Sam is not alone. Many students optimize for the most immediate social or emotional payout. Whether that is the laugh from a joke or the glory of being “first finished”, the principle is the same, they are responding to the incentives that feel most rewarding in the moment.

The Takeaway for Teachers

Students do not need convincing that incentives drive behavior, they already live it. The task for teachers is to offer an alternative incentive structure where academic effort and positive behavior outcompete peer driven rewards.

That does not mean bribing students, but rather surfacing a different economy, points, tokens, or recognition systems that make effort feel visible, valuable, and immediate. The same drive that fuels blurting out in search of laughter or rushing work for peer approval can fuel participation, collaboration, or persistence, if the reward structure pays out in the right currency.

References

• Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Self determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
• Ayllon, T., & Azrin, N. H. (1968). The token economy, A motivational system for therapy and rehabilitation. New York, Appleton Century Crofts.