Motivation Science, Vol 11(4), Dec 2025, 403-407; doi:10.1037/mot0000406
Motivation science and psychology in general are at a crossroads. Advancements in methodological rigor yielded sophisticated experiments and exacting statistical analyses; yet, the pursuit of empirical precision may have overshadowed the field’s commitment to theoretical depth. This article argues that motivation science has become structurally imbalanced, prioritizing puzzle solving over genuine theory building, leading to fragmented findings and diminished understanding of the profound why behind human behavior. Drawing parallels with natural sciences, we contend that robust theory is essential for observation and discovery, akin to a lens through which data gain meaning. We trace the historical trajectory of this imbalance, from the field’s early, theoretically vibrant period to its current prevention-focused climate, shaped by crises and institutional pressures. We propose a strategic recalibration: cultivating theorizing as a teachable skill within graduate curricula and advocating for differentiated research roles to foster collaborative teams of conceptual “builders” and empirical “testers.” Our rigorous methodologies will then serve a renewed theoretical ambition, enriching our understanding of human motivation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)