Abstract
Experimental literature is examined to determine the extent to which the behavioral effects of the biological drives may be considered unique, with resultant implications for theories of personality. It is found, for example, that drives do not usually dominate over non-viscerogenic strivings except when deprivation is extreme and that there is no experimental evidence at present to suggest that drives are more primary in behavioral development than sensory activities. That drive and reinforcement do not provide satisfactory explanations for the ubiquity of animal motivation may indicate a need for fresh lines of theory and experimentation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
