Maclean N, Pound P
Department of Public Health Sciences, Guy's King's and St Thomas' School of Medicine, London, UK.
Soc Sci Med. 2000 Feb;50(4):495-506. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00334-2.
Rehabilitation professionals have long suspected that a patient's motivation plays an important role in determining the outcome of therapy, despite the lack of a clear definition of the phenomenon. The fact that such a subjective concept is commonly used by clinicians prompted this investigation into the range and nature of professional understandings of patient motivation. The literature dealing with physical rehabilitation and motivation was reviewed and was found to fall into three broad groups. One group of mainly clinical articles conceives of motivation as an internal 'personality trait' of the individual patient, and explains the nature and causes of motivation purely in terms of internal dispositions. Another body of literature considers motivation to be a quality which is affected by social factors, and stresses the importance of awareness of such factors in explaining motivation. The third approach considers social factors in combination with personality or clinical characteristics. It is argued that the personality-based approach facilitates moralising in the therapeutic encounter, a problem which is both highlighted and critiqued by the methodology which emphasises the importance of social factors. The practical implications of the relative merits of these different theories of motivation are considered.
长期以来,康复专业人员一直怀疑患者的动机在决定治疗结果方面起着重要作用,尽管这一现象缺乏明确的定义。临床医生普遍使用这样一个主观概念,这促使人们对专业人员对患者动机的理解范围和性质展开调查。对有关身体康复和动机的文献进行了综述,发现其大致可分为三大类。第一类主要是临床文章,将动机视为个体患者的一种内在“人格特质”,并纯粹从内在性格方面解释动机的性质和成因。另一类文献认为动机是一种受社会因素影响的特质,并强调在解释动机时认识这些因素的重要性。第三种方法则将社会因素与人格或临床特征结合起来考虑。有人认为,基于人格的方法会在治疗过程中助长说教,而强调社会因素重要性的方法既凸显了这一问题,也对其进行了批判。文中还考虑了这些不同动机理论的相对优点所具有的实际意义。