Shifts in Behavior

Our behavior is correlated with our motivation. We can be motivated from within by our interests, values, or curiosity. And often times, external factors influence our behavior and actions. Determining where our motivation lies behind the choices we make, Edward L. Deci and Richard Ryan developed the Self-Determination Theory. Within that theory are two components: the Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET) and the Organismic Integration Theory (OIT)—which will be the focus of today's post. 
   
Brief Overview

The Organismic Integration Theory (OIT) details the "different forms of extrinsic motivation and the contextual factors that either promote or hinder internalization and integration of the regulation for these behaviors" within the Self-Determination Continuum (Ryan and Deci 72). There are four types of extrinsic motivation, distinguished by their degree of autonomy: 
→External Regulation
     ∟not at all autonomous
     ∟behavior is performed to obtain reward or to satisfy a need
→Introjected Regulation
     ∟somewhat autonomous
     ∟behavior is motivated out of guilt
→Identified Regulation
     ∟mostly autonomous
     ∟behavior is done for some personal investment
→Integrated Regulation
     ∟fully autonomous
     ∟behavior is fully accepted and valued

Motivational Regulations in Armand Roulin

At the start of the film, Armand Roulin was in a state of apathy. He was portrayed, at first, as an indifferent character with no intention or desire to deliver Vincent's letter. Prior to this, his relationship with Vincent was insignificant and any thoughts or feelings towards the artist were minuscule and negative unlike his father who considered the artist his friend. What would he gain by delivering this lost letter? 

"Live longer, you'll see. Life can even bring down the strong."

"But what good would delivering that letter do now?"

Armand was insensitive to Vincent's death and to those who were affected. He saw there was no gain from delivering the letter addressed to Vincent's brother Theo. However, his father felt strongly about the injustice the artist suffered. The artist claimed in a letter that he was "calm and in a normal state" after receiving help, which raised suspicion surrounding his death. Feeling sympathetic to his father's grief, Armand questioned the importance of delivering the letter. To which he answered, putting Armand in the shoes of Theo, "Wouldn't you want it if it was me?"

Motivation is not physical. Therefore, behavior must be observed and analyzed to infer motivation by its behavioral manifestations and antecedents. From the cinematography, it's clear that there was a moment of remorse which then transitioned to reluctant willingness from Armand. The conversation with his father initiated his motivation to go on the journey to deliver the letter. His motivation took form as an obligation to his father. There were little to no personal gains nor control over his decision, it was out of guilt towards his father that gave external rise to his motivational state.

When he arrived in Paris and met with Pére Tanguy to find the whereabouts of Theo van Gogh, Armand learned that Theo had dead six months after Vincent shot himself. Pére spoke kindly of Vincent and his close relationship with his brother Theo. He shared bits of information from his past to the start of his painting career, and he spoke well of his ambitions and exceptional brilliance. Unsure if the curiosity that grew within him was his or his father's, his feelings wavered. He was unsatisfied that the letter still had no recipient and made the rash decision to continue his journey instead of returning home. His only lead was to find Dr. Gachet, a doctor in Auvers-sur-Oise who looked after Vincent. 

"There is this doctor who I believe is the person to entrust the letter to."

When he arrived to Dr. Gachet's abode, he met the house keeper Louise Chavelier who informed him the doctor was out on business. Rather than hand the letter to Louise, Armand insisted that he hand-deliver the letter to Dr. Gachet himself because he had questions about Vincent. His insistence increased his motivation, becoming more aware of his need for answers. Louise had no issue sharing her opinion on the artist. Amused, but not taken too lightly of her comments, Armand made his way to the Ravoux Inn—the same inn Vincent stayed in during his time there.

"He had these bewildered eyes in which there was something insane, something which you dare not to look."

Throughout the film, Armand met with several other characters that knew Vincent and had their own opinions on his disposition and death. Each shared their piece to him as his feelings evolved and the shifts in his behavior transitioned from a desire to complete an obligation to his father to a desire to solve the mystery behind the artist's tragic death. 

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, (1), 68.