Do Rewards Make Kids Love Learning, or Kill It?

Tutriva connects students with tutors who build motivation through mastery and genuine engagement. Browse tutor profiles →

Many parents and schools use reward systems to encourage learning: sticker charts, points, prizes for completion, grades tied to effort. The logic seems sound. If a child associates learning with something positive, they should want to learn more. The research, however, tells a more complicated story.

The overjustification effect

In the 1970s, psychologist Mark Lepper and colleagues at Stanford conducted a well-known experiment with preschool children who already enjoyed drawing. Some children were told in advance they would receive a reward for drawing. Others drew without any reward mentioned. Afterward, the researchers removed rewards and observed free play. Children who had been promised a reward for drawing spent significantly less time drawing voluntarily than those who had not.

This finding, replicated many times since across different ages and activities, reflects what researchers call the overjustification effect. When an external reward is introduced for an activity a person was already doing for its own sake, the reward can shift their understanding of why they do it. The activity becomes something you do to earn something else. Remove the reward, and the motivation shrinks alongside it.

When rewards do and do not work

Rewards are not always counterproductive. Research by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, who developed Self-Determination Theory, suggests that rewards can support motivation when they are unexpected rather than promised, when they provide specific positive feedback on performance rather than simply recognizing completion, and when the task is genuinely uninteresting and intrinsic motivation is not already present.

The problem arises most reliably when rewards are used for activities the child was already interested in, when they are contingent on compliance rather than mastery, or when they are withheld as punishment. In those conditions, they tend to reduce the internal sense of competence and autonomy that drives lasting learning.

What builds lasting motivation instead

Deci and Ryan’s research identifies three conditions that support intrinsic motivation over time: autonomy, the sense of having genuine choice in what and how one learns; competence, the experience of real progress through effort; and relatedness, a sense of connection to the people and purposes involved in the learning. These conditions do not require prizes. They require thoughtful design.

This is where one-on-one tutoring has a structural advantage. A tutor can adjust the pace, the method, and the framing of a session in ways that a classroom of thirty rarely can. They can give a student genuine input into how the work is organized. They can sequence material so that the student experiences real forward movement. And they can make the relationship itself a source of motivation.

On Tutriva, students choose who they work with and can message tutors directly before committing. Browse profiles →