For the love of it: The overjustification effect and motivation crowding theory as the missing pieces in discussions of basic income’s (a)motivating potential

[...]inflammatory claims that extrinsic motivations “can extinguish intrinsic motivation” (Pink, 2009, p. 9) entirely are unlikely, and feed into the misconception that the two forms of motivation are effectively dichotomized. Importantly, however, it is noteworthy that all jobs necessarily involve some level of extrinsic motivating potential. [...]although the overjustification effect has been well-established in some instances (e.g., Deci et al., 1999), it has nonetheless not stopped workers from pursing paid work that they enjoy, as shown by a preponderance of evidence regarding the employment of people who, financially, do not ‘need’ to work, including but not limited to the lottery examples offered by Hüffmeier and Zacher (2021). The lack of contingency is key An important note of emphasis is that BI, as the focal article admits, is explicitly not a performance-contingent reward, and thus, I argue, it is unlikely to suffer the negative impact of the overjustification effect in the same way as do extrinsic rewards that are directly associated with the work (e.g., pay). Some industries have already recognized and accounted for this (e.g., many trash collectors are paid quite well), but most have not. [...]this is likely to be a ramification of BI that will be at the heart of many critics’ pushback on the idea.