Journal of Research in Personality 47 (2013) 41–51

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Research in Personality
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jrp

Psychological need satisfaction across levels of experience: Their organizationand contribution to general well-being
Marina Milyavskaya a,⇑, Frederick L. Philippe b, Richard Koestner aab

Department of Psychology, McGill University, 1205 Dr. Penﬁeld Avenue, Montreal, QC, Canada H3A 1B1
Department of Psychology, University of Quebec at Montreal, P.O. Box 8888, Station Centre-Ville, Montreal, QC, Canada H3C 3P8

a r t i c l e

i n f oArticle history:
Available online 8 November 2012
Keywords:
Self-determination theory
Psychological needs
Well-being
Hierarchical models
Heterarchical models

a b s t r a c t
The present research examines the interrelation between psychological need satisfaction at the general,
domain-speciﬁc, and episodic levels of experience, and the extent to which need satisfaction at each level
predicts general well-being independently of the other levels. Results show evidence for both top-down
and bottom-up effects of need satisfaction across three levels of experience and provide support for a heterarchical model of need satisfaction. Psychological need satisfaction at three distinct levels of experience
independently contributes to general well-being both measured concurrently and prospectively. Overall,
the present research provides a theoretical and empirical model of the organization of need satisfaction
across multiple levels of experience. This supports the importance of assessing need satisfaction at multiple levels of experience.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
As people go through their everyday lives, a variety of experiences become encoded in long-term memory as representations.
People are then able to think back to these experiences at different
levels of abstraction, from the episodic (‘I enjoyed my last work
meeting’), to the contextual (‘I really like my job’), to the general(‘my life is pretty good’). Although a great deal of research has
looked at how self-aspects and self-attributes may be organizedin the self (e.g., Marsh & Yeung, 1998; McAdams, 1995; McConnell,
2011; Schell, Klein, & Babey, 1996; Shavelson, Hubner, & Stanton,
1976; Wood & Roberts, 2006), very little research has examined
how experiences are organized across different levels of the selfand how these experiences combine to inﬂuence broad life outcomes, such as well-being. In the present paper, we examine thisquestion through the lens of self-determination theory, focusing
on the role of psychological need satisfaction across levels of experience. Speciﬁcally, we propose that the satisfaction of basic psychological needs at different levels of experience can affectoutcomes across levels, focusing on well-being as our outcome ofinterest.
Self-determination posits the existence of three basic psychological needs (Deci & Ryan, 2000). These are autonomy, or feelinglike your actions are in line with your interests and values; compe-⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Department of Psychology, McGill University,
Stewart Biology Building, 1205 Dr. Penﬁeld Avenue, Montréal, QC, Canada H3A 1B1.
Fax: +1 514 398 4896.
E-mail address: marina.milyavskaya@mail.mcgill.ca (M. Milyavskaya).
0092-6566/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.10.013

tence, feelings of mastery over one’s environment; and relatedness,feeling close and connected to others. The satisfaction of theseneeds has been consistently linked with positive outcomes, including greater general well-being and psychological adjustment (Deci& Ryan, 2000). Furthermore, need satisfaction experienced in a
multitude of speciﬁc domains, such as school, work, relationships,
and leisure, has also been linked both to domain-speciﬁc and to
general well-being (Deci & Ryan, 2008; Milyavskaya & Koestner,
2011; Patrick, Knee, Canevello, & Lonsbary, 2007). Finally, at theepisodic level, it has been shown that need satisfaction experienced in speciﬁc life episodes also contributes to well-being(Philippe, Koestner, Beaulieu-Pelletier, & Lecours, 2011; Philippe,
Koestner, Beaulieu-Pelletier, Lecours, & Lekes, 2012). Although allthese studies provide evidence for the role of need satisfaction
across multiple levels of experience in well-being, none have speciﬁcally investigated the structure of these levels. Indeed, SDT
researchers have typically drawn conclusions about the effects ofneed satisfaction without considering whether need satisfaction
was measured at the global, contextual, or episodic level. In thepresent research, we investigate the relationship among these levels of need satisfaction and their effects on well-being by contrasting hierarchical and heterarchical models, which have both beenused in the literature to explain how people use their cognitions
at various levels to express who they are or what they experience.
1.1. Hierarchical and heterarchical models
Hierarchical models imply that mental representations are organized from the most basic and concrete units at the lower end

42

M. Milyavskaya et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 47 (2013) 41–51

of the hierarchy to the most abstract representations at the top of
the hierarchy (Cohen, 2000). In addition, lower-level representations are fully subsumed under mid-level representations, which
are further subsumed under high-level representations (seeFig. 1a). Shavelson et al. (1976) proposed one of the ﬁrst such models of the organization of the self. They posited a hierarchical modelof self-concept where both academic and non-academic self-concept
combine into a higher-order ‘general self-concept’ factor, andwhere academic self-concept can be further subdivided based on
speciﬁc self-concepts in particular areas (reading, math, etc.). Similarly, in their Personality and Role Identity Structure Model, Woodand Roberts (2006) showed that personality is structured in such a
way that general personality traits or dispositions subsume
distinct role identities, which in turn, are based on speciﬁc
experiences in those roles. Other comparable hierarchical models
have been proposed with supporting evidence in the realms ofattachment systems (Pierce & Lydon, 2001), self-concept (McConnell,2011), life satisfaction (Heller, Watson, & Ilies, 2004), and motivation (Vallerand, 1997).
In such models, the lower-level units often serve to build up thehigher-level into more abstract representations (Markus, 1977;
Schimmack, 2008; Vallerand, 1997). For example, a woman’s speciﬁc episode of success at work could serve to build up her feelingsof competence at work, which could further enhance her general
feelings of competency. This process within a hierarchical model
has been termed the bottom-up effect, which means that the representations at the lower end of the hierarchy lead to changes in
the more abstract and general representations at the top of thehierarchy. Inversely, top-down effects imply that representations
at the top of the hierarchy inﬂuence representations at the bottomof the hierarchy. For example, one’s global motivational orientation(autonomous or controlled) could inﬂuence one’s motivation in a

Fig. 1. Hierarchical (1a) and heterarchical (1b) organization of interactions among three levels of experience and well-being.

M. Milyavskaya et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 47 (2013) 41–51

speciﬁc domain (school), which could further inﬂuence one’s motivation toward a speciﬁc task (writing a school report) (Vallerand,1997).
Similar to hierarchical models, heterarchical models (e.g., Berntson& Cacioppo, 2008) also imply that lower levels are associated withhigher levels and also expect top-down and bottom-up effects.
However, hierarchical models imply that each lower level is perfectly subsumed in the other higher levels (e.g., Vallerand, 1997;
Wood & Roberts, 2006). In contrast, in heterarchical models, eachlevel remains partly independent from one another and each isonly partially subsumed under each other (see Fig. 1b). As such,
each level can uniquely contribute to build upper levels, guide a
person’s actions, or inﬂuence a particular outcome such as wellbeing or adjustment. This is because the information containedin each level is not fully redundant, even if part of the informationin the lower levels has been used to build up the upper levels. For
example, a woman’s feelings of competence at work may only bepartly represented in her general feelings of competence in her life
or even not at all. Similarly, a speciﬁc episode of success at work forthis woman may positively affect her general well-being, even if
her general perceptions of competence are chronically low andnegatively impact her well-being.
Heterarchical models are more popular in other disciplines,
such as biology and neurology, and very few models have been
proposed in personality and social psychology, with a few exceptions (e.g., Peck, 2007). Nevertheless, indirect empirical ﬁndings
for such types of models can be found in the psychology literature,
showing how various levels of the self can combine to predict
important outcomes, instead of being redundant with each other(e.g. Davis, Morris, & Kraus, 1998). Indeed, many models proposed
to be hierarchical actually exhibit evidence of heterarchical structure. For example, Pierce and Lydon (2001) showed that global
attachment experiences shared only a modest amount of variancewith relationship-speciﬁc attachment experiences (e.g., experiences with one’s father or friend) and that both uniquely predict
the quality of daily social interactions with the relationship-speciﬁcpartner (see Heller et al. (2004) and Marsh, Trautwein, Ludtke,
Koller, and Baumert (2006) for further examples). In the present
research, we sought to compare hierarchical and heterarchicalmodels of levels of experience of need satisfaction and investigate
if each level may combine to predict upper levels and well-being.
1.2. Present research
In the present research, we looked at three levels of experienceof need satisfaction—general, contextual, and episodic. Need satisfaction at the general level represents a person’s general impression of whether his or her needs have been satisﬁed or thwarted.
This may include a summary representation of lower levels of
experience (contexts and episodes) and corresponds to the mostabstract and general representations of one’s need satisfaction
experiences.
At the next level, we ﬁnd domains in which people repeatedly
engage, such as school, work and friends, and which represent‘‘distinct spheres of human activity’’ (Emmons, 1995). Psychological need satisfaction in a domain encompasses a person’s rangeof experiences in that domain, and is typically thought to be basedon the extent to which the contextual or structural elements of thedomain provide adequate support (for a review, see Deci & Ryan,
2008).
Finally, need satisfaction at the episodic level concerns theamount of need satisfaction experienced in a speciﬁc life episode.
This level is to be differentiated from what is sometimes called
the situational level, which refers to how people feel at the present
moment (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990) or after having engaged in a
speciﬁc task (e.g., Guay, Vallerand, & Blanchard, 2000). Such

43

situational experiences are not the focus of the present study, because the models we seek to test examine various levels of experiences of need satisfaction as encoded and integrated in the self orin memory. Obviously, how one feels right now does not necessarily imply that this immediate experience will be encoded in memory or in the self, as most daily experiences are quickly forgotten(Conway & Pleydell-Pearce, 2000). In contrast, those episodes that
do get encoded in memory are typically meaningful episodes andare often recalled as part of one’s autobiographical memory; needsatisfaction in such episodes has previously been shown to inﬂuence well-being and other positive outcomes (e.g., Philippe et al.,2012).
The present research contributes to the literature in multiple
ways. First, although evidence exists for the importance of needsatisfaction at the general, contextual, and episodic level, no theoretical model exists to account for how these levels of experienceof need satisfaction are organized in the self. In the present research, we sought to examine two such competing models, which
will allow us to derive insights into how levels of experience areorganized. Second, evidence has consistently shown that need satisfaction at each of these levels is associated with well-being, but
again, no research has investigated whether these levels combinewith each other to affect well-being or if they are simply redundantwith each other. The present research will allow us to provide aclear answer to this issue. Finally, many phenomena reported in
the SDT literature seems to conform to top-down effects, sincebroad representations of general need satisfaction (or deprivation)
seems to affect expectations and experiences of need satisfaction
in contextual and episodic levels (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Conversely,
very few bottom-up effects have been examined and reported.
The present research thus also seeks to extend the literature on
bottom-up effects of need satisfaction and to help classify andunderstand what seem to be top-down effects of need satisfaction.
Overall, this research tests the following three hypotheses; theﬁrst two are consistent with both types of models, while the third
one pits the two models against each other:
1. Need satisfaction experience in each life context/domain or ineach life episode should uniquely predict general experienceof need satisfaction, conforming to bottom-up effects which
would be predicted by both models.
2. The organization of need satisfaction across the three levels will
exhibit top-down effects. One strategy to evaluate top-down
effect is that need satisfaction experienced in each domainshould be correlated. However, this correlation should drop
considerably after controlling for general need satisfaction,
which implies that the common variance in the experience ofneed satisfaction across contexts is attributable to the topdown effect of general need satisfaction (for a similar statisticalstrategy to assess top-down effects, see Wood & Roberts, 2006).
3. (a) Hierarchical models posit that each lower-level is perfectly
subsumed under higher-levels. Therefore, the relationshipbetween need satisfaction assessed at the episodic level andat the general level should be mediated by need satisfaction
at the contextual level. Similarly, the relationship between needsatisfaction assessed at the episodic level or at the contextual
level and well-being should be fully mediated by general needsatisfaction. (b) Conversely, heterarchical models posit thateach level remains partly independent of each other. Therefore,
need satisfaction assessed at the episodic level should predictneed satisfaction at the general level even after controlling forneed satisfaction at the contextual level. Similarly, need satisfaction assessed at the episodic level and at the contextual levelshould uniquely and additively predict well-being, even after
controlling for general need satisfaction, which should also
additively predict well-being.

44

M. Milyavskaya et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 47 (2013) 41–51

Given the wide range of measures and indicators that have beenused in past research to highlight the relationship between needsatisfaction and well-being or adjustment criteria (e.g., affect, life
satisfaction, stress, self-esteem, vitality, physical symptoms, psychological well-being), we did not limit our investigation to one
type of measure, but rather used a diverse number of well-being
and adjustment measures across the present studies. In addition,
we also used various existing measures of need satisfaction, either
using the same items adapted to each level (stronger correlations
among levels, but more stringent test to predict outcomes over
and above these levels) or different items (lower correlations
among levels).
2. Study 1
In this study, participants indicated two important domains inwhich they were involved and reported on their experiences ofautonomy, competence, and relatedness in each domain. They also
completed a general measure of psychological need satisfaction
and several measures of well-being. In line with both tested models, we expected that need satisfaction in each domain would uniquely predict ratings of general need satisfaction (bottom-up
effect). In addition, we expected that the correlation between needsatisfaction in each domain would drop after controlling for general need satisfaction (top-down effect). We did not make any
hypothesis about the size of the zero-order correlation between
need satisfaction in each domain, given that past research has
found either strong (Wood & Roberts, 2006) or weak (Marsh &Yeung, 1998) correlations for mid-level units (e.g., self-aspects,
roles identity). Finally, hierarchical models would imply that therelationship between need satisfaction in the domains and wellbeing should be fully mediated by general need satisfaction. In
contrast, heterarchical models would expect that need satisfactionin each domain should be uniquely associated with well-being,
even after controlling for general need satisfaction, which should
also be associated with well-being.
2.1. Method
2.1.1. Participants and procedure
Participants were recruited through online classiﬁed ads andthrough a Facebook event, and offered a 10$ gift card to amazon.ca
for completing an online survey about important life domains. Twohundred and eighteen adults from the general population (approximately half were students) responded to the survey. As the survey
was expected to take approximately 30–45 min, we removed all
respondents who completed the survey in less than 20 min(n = 10). We also removed ﬁve participants who either rated thesame domains twice or left some of the measures entirely blank.
The ﬁnal sample was composed of 203 adults (62.6% female; twoparticipants did not indicate gender) ages 18–71 (M = 24.55,
SD = 7.03).1
Participants completed some general personality questionnaires and then were asked to name domains in which they wereinvolved and completed measures for each of these domains. We
used the ﬁrst two domains indicated by each participant as thosethat are most central and in which they were most involved. Aftercompleting measures of need satisfaction in each domain, participants completed a measure of general need satisfaction followedby the well-being measures.
1

These data come from a larger study of psychological need satisfaction; results
linking domain need satisfaction with domain well-being have previously beenreported in Milyavskaya and Koestner (2011). However, in that paper, general needsatisfaction and general well-being were not considered.

2.1.2. Measures
2.1.2.1. General and domain need satisfaction. A 24-item scale wasadapted from previous scales of need satisfaction (Gagné, 2003;
LaGuardia, Ryan, Couchman, & Deci, 2000) to assess competence(e.g., ‘‘In this domain, I feel like a competent person’’), relatedness(e.g., ‘‘I feel that the other people in this domain sincerely careabout me’’), and autonomy (e.g., ‘‘I am free to express my ideas
and opinions in this domain’’) in each domain. Responses weremade on a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (completely true). We combined all the items to form a measure of overall need satisfaction in each domain. The same 24 item measure
was also used to assess general need satisfaction, with instructions
to answer the questions ‘‘about your life in general’’. Using the exact same items, with a different reference point ensures that thegeneral and domain need satisfaction measures are equivalent toeach other. This scale had a high reliability, a = .90 for Domain 1,
a = .89 for Domain 2, and a = .94 for general need satisfaction.
2.1.2.2. General well-being. Six different aspects of well-being wereassessed in this study. Participants completed a 9-item scale of affect (Emmons, 1992) asking them the extent to which they generally felt that way, which included four positive (e.g., joyful) and ﬁve
negative (e.g., frustrated) items rated on a scale from 1 (not at all) to
7 (extremely). A 7-item psychological vitality scale (Ryan & Frederick,1997) assessed the degree to which participants felt physically andmentally vigorous and alert (e.g., ‘‘I feel energized’’). Satisfaction
with life was assessed using the ﬁve-item Satisfaction with Life
Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Grifﬁn, 1985). Both vitality and life satisfaction were assessed on a 7-poiunt scale ranging
from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (very true) Participants also completed
a measure assessing the extent to which they experienced ninephysical symptoms (headaches, stomachache/pain, chest/heart
pain, runny or congested nose, coughing/sore throat, faintness/dizziness, shortness of breath, acne/pimples, stiff/sore muscles) overthe past 2 weeks, ranging from never to very often (Emmons,
1992). Finally, participants completed the 4-item Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS; Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999) consisting of items
assessing absolute ratings of happiness and ratings relative topeers, as well as the extent to which a characterization of a happy
and unhappy individual describes the respondent. All the scales
were reliable, a = .89 for positive affect; a = .88 for negative affect;a = .92 for vitality; a = .90 for SWLS; a = .74 for symptoms; anda = .90 for the SHS. An Exploratory Factor Analysis with Principal
Axis Factoring as the method of estimation was conducted on allmeasured aspects of well-being. Only one factor was extracted(second highest Eigen Value = .91), accounting for 61% of the variance. All well-being aspects loaded on this component, with factor
loadings ranging from .35 to .89. Therefore, all well-being scales
were averaged to form an index measure of well-being.
2.2. Results
Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations and correlations among all study variables. In this study, need satisfaction in
Table 1Means, standard deviations, and correlations among need satisfaction and well-being
in domains and in general: Study 1.

1. Need satisfaction Domain 1
2. Need satisfaction Domain 2
3. General need satisfaction
4. General well-beinga
Note: n = 197.
**
p < .01.
aStandardized scores.

Means

SD

1

2

3

4.34
4.87
5.12
0.00

0.96
0.89
0.96
0.79

–
.39**
.50**
.49**

–
.49**
.50**

–
.82**

45

M. Milyavskaya et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 47 (2013) 41–51

the two domains were positively correlated, r = .39, p < .01 andwere positively associated with general need satisfaction andwell-being. General need satisfaction was also strongly associatedwith well-being.
A conﬁrmatory factor analysis using Maximum Likelihood as
the method of estimation was conducted in Mplus 6.12 (Muthén& Muthén, 1998–2011) in order to examine whether need satisfaction in each domain and with respect to general need satisfaction
could be differentiated into distinct factors, or whether they would
be better described by one single factor. We correlated the residual
terms of the same need across the two domains and with generalneed satisfaction (e.g. the residual variance of autonomy for Domain 1 was correlated with the residual variance of autonomy
for Domain 2 and autonomy assessed in general), given that thesame items were used with slight adaptations to measure both domains and general need satisfaction. Consequently, a measurement
error found for one need (e.g., a limited understanding of an item)
should also be found for this need at the other level. Results for athree-factor model revealed excellent ﬁt indices, v2(15) = 19.95,
ns, CFI = .99, TLI = .98, RMSEA = .04 [.00; .08]. SRMR = .03,
AIC = 4939.46. See Table 2 for the covariance matrix. A two-factor
model, where need satisfaction in both domains converge under asingle factor and a one-factor model, combining all need satisfaction measures under the same latent variable, were then tested.
Results revealed poorer ﬁt indices for the two-factor model,
v2(17) = 57.96, p < .01, Dv2(2) = 38.01, p < .001, CFI = .93,
TLI = .85, RMSEA = .11 [.08; .14], SRMR = .05, AIC = 4973.47 and an
even poorer ﬁt for the single-factor model, v2(18) = 108.28,
p < .01, Dv2(3) = 88.33, p < .001, CFI = .84, TLI = .68, RMSEA = .16[.13; .19], SRMR = .084, AIC = 5021.79. The model with the lowest
AIC value—the original model—should be preferred. Thus, there isevidence that need satisfaction assessed in different domains are
distinct from each other and are further distinct from general needsatisfaction.
A ﬁrst hierarchical multiple regression was conducted to examine the presence of a top-down effect. Need satisfaction in Domain
2 served as the dependent variable and at Step 1, need satisfaction
in Domain 1 was entered, followed by general need satisfaction at
Step 2. Results showed that need satisfaction in Domain 1 was positively associated with need satisfaction in Domain 2 (b = .39,
p < .01) and this association was signiﬁcantly reduced by the inclusion of general need satisfaction at Step 2 (b = .19, p < .01).
Although general need satisfaction is not a mediator between needsatisfaction in the two domains, but rather what has been termed aconfounder (MacKinnon, 2008), the same statistical procedureused for mediations can be used to assess whether the relationshipbetween the two domains is explained by general need satisfaction(in other words, whether the association between the two domains
is signiﬁcantly decreased by the inclusion of general need satisfaction). A bootstrap procedure using 1000 resamples revealed thatthe relationship between the two domains was signiﬁcantly explained by general need satisfaction, as zero was not included in
the obtained 95% conﬁdence intervals, [.11; .27].

A second multiple regression analysis was conducted to investigate the degree to which the need satisfaction experienced in eachlife domain contributes to build up one’s general perceptions ofneed satisfaction in life (bottom-up effect). If only top-down effects
exist, then need satisfaction in each domain should be redundantand should cancel each other out in predicting general need satisfaction. If bottom-up effects also exist, need satisfaction in each domain should independently predict general need satisfaction.
Results showed that need satisfaction in both domains werepositively and uniquely associated with general need satisfaction,b = .36, p < .01 for Domain 1 and b = .35, p < .01, for Domain 2(see Table 3 for regression results). Together, both domains explained 35% of the variance in general need satisfaction; Domain
1 explained 12% of the variance, and Domain 2 explained 11%,
while the other 13% was due to the shared variance of the two domains. This result suggests that when need satisfaction is experienced in different important life domains, each uniquely
contributes to build up one’s perceptions of general needsatisfaction.
Another multiple regression analysis was conducted to examine
the bottom-up effect of need satisfaction in each domain on wellbeing. Results showed that the two domains signiﬁcantly and positively predicted well-being, F(2, 194) = 52.77, p < .01, R2 = .35. In
addition, need satisfaction characterizing each domain uniquely
predicted well-being, with Domains 1 and 2 each accounting for
11% of the variance in well-being and the shared variance of thetwo domains accounting for 13% of the variance in well-being.
All coefﬁcients are presented in Table 3.
Finally, the critical analysis to distinguish a hierarchical from aheterarchical model was that in the former model, general needsatisfaction should predict all the variance in well-being and needsatisfaction in each domain should not be predictive of well-being,
once general need satisfaction is taken into account. In the lattermodel, however, need satisfaction in each domain should uniquely
predict well-being, even after controlling for general need satisfaction. Using a multiple regression analysis again, at Step 1, whengeneral need satisfaction was entered, results showed that thisvariable was strongly and positively associated with well-being,b = .81, p < .01, accounting for 67% of its variance, F(1, 195) =389.40, p < .01. At Step 2, when need satisfaction characterizing
each of the two domains were entered, results revealed that eachof them were positively and uniquely associated with well-being,
Domain 1: b = .10, p < .05; Domain 2: b = .11, p < .05, accountingfor 1.8% of the variance of well-being, over and above general needsatisfaction, DF(2, 193) = 5.62, p < .01. This latter regression analysis also allowed us to determine that general need satisfaction
and domain need satisfaction together explained 69% of the variance of well-being, 33% of which was shared between generaland domain need satisfaction. Table 3. presents all the regression
analyses.
These results present initial evidence for the existence of both
top-down and bottom-up effects of psychological need satisfaction. The correlation between need satisfaction in the two life

Table 2
Covariance matrix used in the CFA examining the distinction between general and domain need satisfaction.
G-Autonomy
G-Competence
G-Relatedness
D1-Autonomy
D1-Competence
D1-Relatedness
D2-Autonomy
D2-CompetenceD2-Relatedness

0.963
0.765
0.658
0.355
0.434
0.31
0.377
0.324
0.372

1.26
0.809
0.369
0.708
0.545
0.297
0.539
0.336

Note: G = General; D1 = Domain 1; D2 = Domain 2.

1.366
0.342
0.475
0.643
0.295
0.294
0.609

1.519
0.599
0.667
0.478
0.235
0.266

1.339
0.601
0.292
0.359
0.174

1.721
0.345
0.262
0.459

1.34
0.425
0.544

0.984
0.383

1.615

46

M. Milyavskaya et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 47 (2013) 41–51
Table 3
Regression analyses from study 1.
General need satisfaction

Well-being

b

b

t

Well-beingt

General NS
Step 1
General NS
Domain 1 NS
Domain 2 NS

.36
.35

5.78**
5.62**
R2 = .35
F(2, 194) = 52.80**

Step 1.36.36

5.68**
5.72**
R2 = .35
F(2, 194) = 52.77**bt

Step 1 R2 = .67.81
19.73**
Step 2 DR2 = .02.72
14.26**
.10
2.04*
.11
2.24*
R2 = .69
F(3, 193) = 139.70**

Note: NS = need satisfaction.
*p < .05.
**
p < .001.

domains dropped signiﬁcantly once we controlled for general needsatisfaction, pointing to the inﬂuence of general need satisfaction
on domain need satisfaction in both domains (top-down effect).
Additionally, need satisfaction in each life domain uniquely contributed to one’s perceptions of general need satisfaction in life
and to well-being, demonstrating a bottom-up effect. Importantly,
need satisfaction assessed with respect to life domains does notappear to be a mere proxy for measures of need satisfaction generally experienced in one’s life, even if the items were the same andthat only the reference point differed. This ﬁnding suggests a heterarchical rather than a hierarchical model. Although domain needsatisfaction and general need satisfaction share a great deal of variance (as would be expected if domain need satisfaction builds up
general need satisfaction), domains need satisfaction preserves adegree of discriminant validity from general need satisfaction inpredicting well-being. The factor analysis conducted in this study
also conﬁrmed that experiences of need satisfaction in the two domains and in general are distinct from each other.
3. Study 2
In the previous study, we showed that need satisfaction in two
important life domains each contributes independently both togeneral perceptions of need satisfaction and to well-being, supporting a heterarchical model of need satisfaction across levels of
experience. In this study, we wanted to replicate these ﬁndings
with another sample and with three rather than two domains.
We thus wanted to again test our hypotheses of both top-down
and bottom-up effects, and also wanted to conﬁrm the heterarchical organization by showing that need satisfaction in each of threedomains would uniquely predict well-being even after controllingfor general need satisfaction. Additionally, we wanted to test
whether the bottom-up effects of domain need satisfaction on general need satisfaction were inﬂuenced by other domain characteristics, particularly the subjective importance of the domain and thetime spent in the domain.

spend in that domain. After completing a questionnaire unrelated
to the present study, they completed the well-being measures.
3.1.2. Measures
3.1.2.1. Domain need satisfaction. The 18-item measure of need satisfaction used by Sheldon and Gunz (2009) was adapted for measuring need satisfaction in speciﬁc life domains. Items assessedautonomy (e.g., ‘In this domain I am free to do things my ownway’), competence (e.g., ‘In this domain I often struggle doing
something I should be good at’; reversed), and relatedness (e.g.,‘In this domain I feel close and connected with other people’). Nineof the 18 items were negatively worded. Responses were made on
a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (completelytrue). All the items were combined to form a measure of overallneed satisfaction in each domain. This scale had a good reliability,a = .86 for Domains 1 and 2, and a = .84 for Domain 3.
3.1.2.2. Domain time and importance. For each domain, participants
rated how important that domain was to them using one item(‘How important is this domain to you?’) ranging from 1 (not at
all important) to 7 (very important). They also rated how much timethey spent in that domain from 1 (less than 5 h) to 7 (more than30 h), with each number in between representing a 5-h increment.
3.1.2.3. General need satisfaction. The extent to which participants
experienced satisfaction of their basic needs in their life in general
was assessed using a combination of the short 9-item Basic Psychological Needs Scale (Gagné, 2003; Ilardi, Leone, Kasser, & Ryan,
1993) and seven items created by Philippe et al. (2011). Five items
measured autonomy (e.g., ‘I generally feel free to express my ideas
and opinions.’), ﬁve items measured competence (e.g., ‘Most days I
feel a sense of accomplishment from what I do.’), and six items
measured relatedness (e.g., ‘I generally feel connected to people.’).
Responses were made on a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (do notagree at all) to 7 (completely agree). To obtain a score of overall needsatisfaction, we combined the mean scores of each subscale. The
scale was reliable, a = .84.

3.1. Method
3.1.1. Participants and procedure
Undergraduate students were recruited for an online survey.
One hundred and seventy-nine participants (61.5% female) aged
17–62 (M = 20.29, SD = 5.35) completed the survey. The study tookapproximately 30 min to complete, and all participants were entered into a draw for one of three prizes of $125. Participants wereﬁrst asked to report on their general need satisfaction and werethen asked to list three domains in which they were involved
and provided ratings of need satisfaction for each domain, as well
as a rating of the importance of the domain and the time they

3.1.2.4. Well-being. Several measures of psychological well-being
were completed by the participants. Perceived stress was measured using the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS; Cohen, Kamarck, &Mermelstein, 1983), a 10-item scale that assesses how often participants felt stressed over the past month (e.g. ‘In the last month,
how often have you been upset because of something that happened unexpectedly?’). Responses were made on a 5-point scale,ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (very often). Global life satisfaction
was assessed using the 5-item Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS;
Diener et al., 1985). The 10-item Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale(RSE; Rosenberg, 1965) was used to measure participants’M. Milyavskaya et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 47 (2013) 41–51

self-esteem (e.g. ‘I feel that I have a number of good qualities’). Finally, eudaimonic well-being was measured using three of the subscales from the short Psychological Well-Being scale (PWB; Ryff &Keyes, 1995). Although the full measure consists of six subscaleswith three items each, three of the subscales (autonomy, environmental mastery, positive relations) overlap with the three psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. We
therefore used questions from the three remaining subscales: personal growth (e.g. ‘For me, life has been a continuous process oflearning, changing, and growth’), purpose in life (e.g. ‘I sometimes
feel as if I have done all there is to do in life’; reversed), and selfacceptance (e.g. ‘I like most aspects of my personality’). Responses
to the SWLS, the RSE, and the PWB were all made on a 7-point
scale, ranging from 1 (do not agree at all) to 7 (completely agree).
All four well-being scales were reliable, a = .86 for the PSS;
a = .85 for the SWLS; a = .90 for the RSE; and a = .72 for the PWB.
An Exploratory Factor Analysis with Principal Axis Factoring as
the method of estimation was conducted on all scales of wellbeing. Only one factor was extracted (second highest Eigen
Value = .57), accounting for 57% of the variance. All well-being
scales loaded strongly on this component, with factor loadings
ranging from .66 to .85. Therefore, all well-being scales wereaveraged to form an index measure of well-being.
3.2. Results
Table 4 presents the means, standard deviations and correlations among all study variables. In this study, need satisfaction in
the third domain was correlated with both of the other domains,but Domains 1 and 2 were uncorrelated. Need satisfaction in eachdomain was positively associated with general need satisfaction
and well-being. General need satisfaction was again strongly associated with well-being.
Multiple regressions were conducted to examine the presenceof top-down effects of general need satisfaction on domain needsatisfaction. Each pair of domain need satisfaction was examinedwhile controlling for general need satisfaction. In each case, theassociation between each domain need satisfaction was signiﬁcantly reduced by the inclusion of general need satisfaction in
the equation (Domain 1 and Domain 3; b = .20, p < .01 to b = .01,
ns; Domain 2 and Domain 3, b = .25, p < .01 to b = .11, ns; Domain
1 and Domain 2: b .01, ns to .24, p < .01). Although the initialassociation between Domain 1 and Domain 2 need satisfaction
was not signiﬁcant, the inclusion of general need satisfaction
turned it into a signiﬁcant negative relationship, thus evidencing
a top-down effect of general need satisfaction. Bootstrapping analyses revealed that all indirect effects were signiﬁcant, with 95%
conﬁdence intervals excluding zero [.13; .31], [.08; .28], [.19; .40],
respectively. These results again suggest that general need satisfaction exerted top-down effects on ratings of need satisfaction in all
three domains.
Another multiple regression analysis was conducted to investigate the degree to which the need satisfaction experienced in eachlife domain contributes to build up one’s general perceptions ofTable 4Means, standard deviations, and correlations among need satisfaction and well-being
in domains and in general: Study 2.

1. Need sat Dom 1
2. Need sat Dom 2
3. Need sat Dom 3
4. General need sat
5. General WB
Note: n = 177.
**
p < .01.

Means

SD

1

4.60
4.75
5.01
5.01
0.00

0.99
1.03
0.92
0.96
0.82

–
.02
.19
.49**
.46**

2

3

4

–
.23
.40**
.34**

–
.40**
.44**

–
.70**

47

need satisfaction in life (bottom-up effects). Results showed thatneed satisfaction in each of the three domains were uniquely andpositively associated with general need satisfaction, b = .45(t = 7.95) for Domain 1, b = .36 (t = 6.30) for Domain 2, and b = .24(t = 4.21) for Domain 3, all ps < .01, F(3, 175) = 52.11, p < .001,
explaining 47% of the variance in general need satisfaction. This result suggests that when need satisfaction is experienced in different important life domains, each uniquely contributes to build up
one’s perceptions of general need satisfaction. Neither time spend
in each of the domains, the importance of the domain, nor theirinteractions with need satisfaction or with each other were significant predictors of general need satisfaction, suggesting that thebottom-up effects of domain need satisfaction on general need satisfaction are not necessarily based on the time spent in that domain and the importance of that domain.
Finally, we tested the heterarchical structure of our data by conducting a multiple regression analysis to examine the speciﬁc contribution of need satisfaction in each domain to well-being, after
controlling for general need satisfaction. At Step 1, when generalneed satisfaction was entered, results showed that this variable
was strongly and positively associated with well-being, (b = .67,
t = 12.01, p < .01), accounting for 44% of its variance,
F(1, 177) = 144.21, p < .01. At Step 2, when need satisfaction characterizing each of the three domains were entered, results revealed
that each of them were positively and uniquely associated withwell-being (Domain 1: b = .20, t = 3.16, p < .01; Domain 2: b = .11,
t = 1.78, p = .08; Domain 3: b = .16, t = 2.71, p < .05), together
accounting for 5.4% of the variance of well-being, over and above
general need satisfaction, DF(3, 174) = 6.35, p < .01.
In this study, we replicated the results from Study 1 with threedomains, showing again that both top-down and bottom-up effects
occur across the general and contextual levels of need satisfaction.
Additionally, we again showed that domain need satisfaction accounts for additional variance in well-being over and above whatis explained by general need satisfaction, which provides support
for a heterarchical structure of need-satisfaction across the levels.
Finally, we used different measures of well-being than in the ﬁrst
study and obtained similar results, suggesting that the effects wefound are not limited to one speciﬁc conceptualization of wellbeing.

4. Study 3
Study 3 examined the structure of need satisfaction at all threelevels of experience and their relation to well-being in a prospective study. More speciﬁcally, at Time 1 participants completed
measures of well-being followed by general need satisfaction,and then, after completing other questionnaires related to goals
they were pursuing (and unrelated to the present study), they described two important domains in their life and rated their level ofneed satisfaction for each domain. In addition, in order to assess
the role of speciﬁc experiences hierarchically subsumed under adomain, we asked the participants to describe a speciﬁc past event
related to each of their important domains (e.g., a life episode). At
Time 2, 4 weeks later, participants were asked to complete thewell-being scales again. We again hypothesized the existence of
top-down effects and expected that the association between needsatisfaction in each life episode and the association between needsatisfaction in each domain would be signiﬁcantly reduced after
controlling for general need satisfaction. In addition, we also expected bottom-up effects, such that need satisfaction in each domain should predict general need satisfaction. Furthermore, needsatisfaction in each life episode should be associated with need satisfaction in the domain to which it pertains, but not with need satisfaction in the domain unrelated to the life episode.

48

M. Milyavskaya et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 47 (2013) 41–51

Crucially, the prospective design and the three-level structureof need satisfaction of the present study allowed us to perform
more rigorous tests of the heterarchical model of need satisfaction
hypothesis. As in Studies 1 and 2, need satisfaction in each domainshould be associated with well-being, even after controlling for
general need satisfaction. In light of the support for a heterarchicalorganization of need satisfaction experience obtained in the previous studies, we also hypothesized that need satisfaction in the life
episodes would uniquely predict general need satisfaction, even if
need satisfaction in each domain is controlled for. In addition, needsatisfaction in the life episodes should be associated with wellbeing, even after controlling for domain need satisfaction and general need satisfaction. Finally, we also expected that these same
hypotheses would also apply when predicting changes in wellbeing over time, such that need satisfaction in the life episodes,
in the domains, and in general should all uniquely predict increases in well-being over time.
4.1. Method
4.1.1. Participants and procedure
Participants were undergraduate students who were taking partin a larger longitudinal study on goal pursuit. Participants weresent the questionnaire electronically, and completed it at home.
Well-being was assessed ﬁrst, followed by general need satisfaction, other items unrelated to the present study (related to people’s
goals and goal pursuit), and then ﬁnally need satisfaction in domains and memories. Four weeks later, participants completed
the follow-up questionnaire online. One hundred and thirty-ﬁve
participants ages 18–32 (M = 20.18, SD = 2.26) completed the initial questionnaire. The participants were mostly female (78.1% female), and three participants did not indicate their gender.
Participants received $20 compensation for completing all study
follow-ups. Only ﬁve participants did not complete the follow-up.
4.1.2. Measures
4.1.2.1. Domain need satisfaction. Participants were asked to nametwo domains in which they were involved using the same description as in Study 2. Participants then rated each domain on a sixitem measure of need satisfaction initially developed for use withmemories (Philippe et al., 2011) and adapted here to assess domains. Sample items include ‘‘In this domain I feel free to do things
and think how I want’’ (autonomy), ‘‘In this domain I feel competent or capable’’ (competence), and ‘‘In this domain I feel connected
to people’’ (relatedness). One item assessing autonomy was negatively worded (‘‘In this domain I feel obliged to do things or thinkin certain ways’’) and reverse-coded. A mean score of overall needsatisfaction was obtained for each domain (a = .76 for the ﬁrst domain; a = .78 for the second domain). All responses were made on
a 7-point scale of 3 (Strongly disagree) to 3 (Strongly agree).
4.1.2.2. Episodic need satisfaction. For each domain, we asked participants to describe a personal memory related to that domainof a speciﬁc moment or event that was signiﬁcant for them(Philippe et al., 2012). The instructions for choosing and describing
the memory were highly similar to those used by Philippe and hiscolleagues, with the exception that participants were asked to describe a memory that was at least 3 months old. Need satisfactionin each recalled episode was then assessed using the same items as
for domain need satisfaction. The scale was reliable, a = .88 for theﬁrst memory and a = .89 for the second memory.
4.1.2.3. General need satisfaction. Participants’ feelings of autonomy(e.g. ‘My choices expressed my ‘‘true self.’’’), competence (e.g. ‘I did
well even at the hard things’) and relatedness (‘I was lonelier thanI’d like to be’; reversed) were measured with 18 items used by

Sheldon and Gunz (2009). We computed a score of overall needsatisfaction by taking the mean of all the items, with the 9 negatively worded items reversed. All responses were made on a 7point scale of 1 (Strongly disagree) to 7 (Strongly agree).The scale
was reliable, a = .82.
4.1.2.4. Well-being measures. Participants’ general well-being wasassessed using the same measures of positive and negative affectand vitality as in Study 1. The same measures were used at the initial survey and at the follow-up. We used more affect-based measures of well-being in this study in order to be able to noticechanges over a short period of time. The scale reliabilities wereas follows: at Time 1, a = .93 for PA, a = .86 for NA, and a = .93
for vitality; at Time 2, a = .90 for PA, a = .81 for NA, and a = .91
for vitality. An Exploratory Factor Analysis with Principal Axis Factoring as the method of estimation was conducted on all measured
aspects of well-being, that is positive and negative emotions andvitality. Only one factor was extracted (second highest Eigen Value = .50), accounting for 61% of the variance. All well-being aspects loaded strongly on this component, with factor loadings
ranging from .66 to .87. The same was true at Time 2. Therefore,
as in the two previous studies, all well-being scales were averaged
to form an index measure of well-being.
4.2. Results
Need satisfaction in the domain-related memories were both
negatively skewed and departed from normality, as indicated by
the Kolmogoroz–Smirnov test of normality, Zs > 1.45, ps < .05. To
correct for this non-normality, both life episode variables weresquared and achieved normality after this transformation. Table 5
presents the means, standard deviations, and correlations among
all study variables. Need satisfaction in the two domains wereagain uncorrelated (r = .09, ns), but need satisfaction in the two
episodes were signiﬁcantly positively correlated, r = .24, p < .01.
Again, need satisfaction in each domain and in each life episodewas positively associated with general need satisfaction and withwell-being (all ps < .10).
Multiple regressions were conducted to examine the presenceof top-down effects of general need satisfaction on domain or life
episode need satisfaction. The relationship between Domain 1
and Domain 2 need satisfaction was examined while controllingfor general need satisfaction. Results showed that the inclusionof general need satisfaction reduced the coefﬁcient of Domain 2
in predicting Domain 1 need satisfaction (b = .09, ns to b = .04,
ns). Bootstrap results revealed that the 90% conﬁdence intervals
did not include zero [.002; .112], thus implying a signiﬁcant topdown effect at p < .10. The relationship between the two life episodes was also examined using the same analytic strategy. Results
revealed that this relationship was signiﬁcantly reduced following
the inclusion of general need satisfaction in the equation (b = .24,
p < .01 to b = .16, p < .10). Bootstrap results conﬁrmed the signiﬁcance of this indirect effect, with 95% conﬁdence intervals that
did not include zero [.01; .19]. These results again suggest that general need satisfaction exerted top-down effects on ratings of needsatisfaction in both domain and life episode need satisfaction.
To examine bottom-up effects, we conducted two regressions,using general need satisfaction as the dependent variable. In separate regressions, need satisfaction in each domain (Domain 1:
b = .14, p = .08 and Domain 2: b = .34, p < .01, F(2, 131) = 11.01,
p < .01, R2 = .14) and need satisfaction in each life episode (Life episode 1: b = .18, p < .05 and Life episode 2: b = .36, p < .01,
F(2, 131) = 15.92, p < .01, R2 = .20), were found to be positively
and uniquely associated with general need satisfaction. We also
examined whether need satisfaction in each life episode would
be associated with need satisfaction in its related domain. Results

49

M. Milyavskaya et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 47 (2013) 41–51
Table 5Means, standard deviations, and correlations among general, domain, and situational need satisfaction and Well-being: Study 3.

b

1. Memory 1 need satisfaction
2. Memory 2 need satisfactionb
3. Domain 1 need satisfaction
4. Domain 2 need satisfaction
5. General need satisfaction
6. Well-being Time 1a
7. Well-being Time 2a

Means

SD

1

2

3

4

5

6

5.18
5.47
5.17
5.54
4.51
0.00
0.00

1.37
1.33
1.06
1.05
0.81
0.85
0.88

–
.24**
.58**
.13
.26**
.40**
.39**

–
.22**
.57**
.36**
.41**
.49**

–
.09
.16*
.29**
.29**

–
.31**
.37**
.38**

–
.71**
.63**

–
.75**

Note: n1 = 135, n2 = 130.
*
p < .10.
**p < .01.
aStandardized scores.
b
Untransformed means and standard deviations.

showed that when predicting Domain 1 need satisfaction, only
need satisfaction in Life episode 1 was associated with it (Life episode 1: b = .53, p < .01 and Life episode 2: b = .10, ns), whereas the
opposite result was obtained when predicting Domain 2 need satisfaction (Life episode 1: b = .03, ns and Life episode 2: b = .57,
p < .01). Finally, testing the heterarchical structure of the three levels of need satisfaction, results showed that episodic need satisfaction was signiﬁcantly associated with general need satisfaction,even after controlling for domain need satisfaction (Life episode
1: b = .22 and Life episode 2: b = .23, ps < .05). This last ﬁnding provides support for bottom-up effects from life episode directly togeneral need satisfaction following a heterarchical organization.
As in Studies 1 and 2, need satisfaction in each of the two domains were positively and uniquely associated with Time 1 wellbeing (Domain 1: b = .26; Domain 2: b = .35; F(2, 131) = 17.38,
R2 = .21, all ps < .01). The same pattern of results was also obtained
for life episodes (Life episode 1: b = .31; Life episode 2: b = .34,
F(2, 131) = 23.68, R2 = .27, all ps < .01). To examine the speciﬁc contribution of domain need satisfaction over and above general needsatisfaction in the prediction of general well-being, a multiple
regression analysis was conducted. At Step 1, general need satisfaction was positively associated with general well-being, b = .71,
p < .01, accounting for 50% of its variance. At Step 2, results showedthat need satisfaction in each domain was positively associatedwith well-being, (Domain 1: b = .18, p < .01; Domain 2: b = .16,
p < .05), accounting for 5.6% of the variance of well-being, over
and above general need satisfaction, F(2, 131) = 8.35, p < .01. The
same pattern of results was also obtained for episodic needsatisfaction. After controlling for general need satisfaction, needsatisfaction in each life episode was positively associated withwell-being, (Life episode 1: b = .20, p < .01; Life episode 2: b = .15,
p < .05), accounting for 6.5% of the variance F(2, 131) = 9.89, p < .01.
In line with a heterarchical organization that implies that eachlevel of experience provides a unique contribution with respect topeople’s well-being, we examined whether domain need satisfaction and episodic need satisfaction would predict well-being independently of each other and independently of general needsatisfaction. To maximize power and given that each domain andlife episode was uniquely associated with well-being (as shown
above), we averaged the two domains together and the two life
episodes together. At Step 1, we controlled for general need satisfaction. At Step 2, results showed that domain need satisfaction
was positively associated with well-being, over and above generalneed satisfaction, b = .25, p < .01, DR2 = .06. At Step 3, results revealed that life episode need satisfaction was positively associatedwith well-being, over and above general and domain need satisfaction, b = .19, p < .05, DR2 = .02. These results thus provide support
again for a heterarchical organization of need satisfying
experiences.
To examine the prospective relationship between need satisfaction assessed at all three levels of experience and well-being, we

conducted a similar hierarchical multiple regression analysis tothe one presented above, but this time predicting well-being measured at Time 2 and controlling at Step 1 for well-being measured
at Time 1. At this ﬁrst step, well-being measured at Time 1 waspositively associated with well-being measured at Time 2, b = .75,
p < .05, R2 = .57. At Step 2, results showed that general need satisfaction predicted increases in well-being over the 4-week period,b = .19, p < .05, F(1, 127) = 5.38, DR2 = .02. At Step 3, domain needsatisfaction was positively associated with increases in well-being
as well, and over and above general need satisfaction, b = .14,
p < .05, F(1, 126) = 4.55, DR2 = .01. Finally, at Step 3, life episodeneed satisfaction predicted increases in well-being, over andabove general and domain need satisfaction, b = .20, p < .01,
F(1, 125) = 7.00, DR2 = .02.
Overall, this study provided further support for a heterarchicalmodel of need satisfaction. Using both correlational and prospective data, this study showed that episodic, domain, and generalneed satisfaction each contributed to general well-being independently of need satisfaction experienced in the other levels. Importantly, the prospective results suggest that need satisfaction ateach level has a directional effect on well-being, such that greaterneed satisfaction leads to increases of well-being over time.
5. General discussion
In a series of three studies, we explored the organization of needsatisfaction across different levels of experience, providing support
for a heterarchical model. Additionally, we showed that psychological need satisfaction at three distinct levels of experience independently contributes to general well-being. As expected in aheterarchical model, episodic and domain need satisfaction werepartially subsumed under general need satisfaction yet were able
to contribute independently to well-being. The effects of domainneed satisfaction on well-being remained when we controlled forgeneral need satisfaction, even when, in Study 1, we used the exact
same items (with a different reference point) in both scales. In
addition, controlling for general and domain need satisfaction did
not eliminate the effect of episodic need satisfaction on well-being,
even when using the exact same items to assess need satisfaction
in both domains and speciﬁc life episodes (Study 3). The uniquerelationship of need satisfaction at each level to well-being wasshown using a broad conceptualization of well-being including hedonic and eudaimonic measures, and extended to a prospective
measure of well-being in Study 3, suggesting that need satisfaction
at different levels of experience can affect changes in well-being.
Additionally, we used different measures of need satisfaction
across the studies, showing that our results are not instrumentspeciﬁc.
This research provides a theoretical and statistical model of theorganization of need satisfaction across multiple levels of experience. We show evidence for both top-down and bottom-up effects,

50

M. Milyavskaya et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 47 (2013) 41–51

which have previously received very limited attention in SDT. In
the present research, the evidence for top-down effects might appear inconsistent if only the correlations between domains are
examined. Indeed, these correlations were only signiﬁcant forsome of the domains in Study 2 and were not signiﬁcant in Study
3. However, partialling out general need satisfaction did signiﬁcantly reduce the correlations in most cases, suggesting that the
top-down effect was present. The size of the correlations between
the domains may depend on the choice of domains selected by theparticipants across the samples.
Additionally, we found particularly strong evidence for the existence of bottom-up effects, which suggest that people’s generalperceptions of need satisfaction are derived from contextual experiences of need satisfaction, which are further derived from theirepisodic experiences. This is in line with previous research on
self-concept (Markus, 1977; McConnell, 2011) and personality
structure (Wood & Roberts, 2006); the current studies represent
the ﬁrst investigation of this type in relation to psychological needsatisfaction.
Overall, this research suggests a mechanism for the way inwhich factors at multiple levels of experience (including personality at the general level and environment characteristics at the domain and episodic levels) can inﬂuence well-being and othergeneral outcomes. Indeed, the factors present at each level would
inﬂuence experiences of need satisfaction, which would in turn affect well-being. Although our research only focused on the latter
relationship (between need satisfaction and well-being), other research has examined some of the factors which lead to need satisfaction at each of the levels. For example, previous research has
consistently demonstrated the importance of supportive environments at the situational and contextual levels for need-satisfying
experiences (see Deci & Ryan, 2008). Additionally, at the general level, research has shown how having an autonomous causality orientation (an aspect of personality; Deci & Ryan, 1985) inﬂuences
perceptions of need satisfaction (e.g., Gagné, 2003). While someof this research has looked at effects across levels (e.g. predicting
work engagement from general need satisfaction and general causality orientations; Gagné, 2003), our model provides a theoreticalframework for understanding such cross-level effects.
Our ﬁnding that each lower-level retains a unique association
with well-being independently of the general perceptions of needsatisfaction also suggests that the general perceptions of need satisfaction are only summary representations of many domain andepisodic experiences of need satisfaction and likely leave out many
important details. However, these general perceptions probably
provide the person with a stable sense of self across situations,which can in itself contribute to increases in well-being (Kernis,2005). One explanation of how domain and episodic need satisfaction may contribute to increased well-being is through the frequent activation of their representations. People keep in memory
their experiences of need satisfaction with respect to speciﬁc domains or particular events and are capable of evaluating theseexperiences almost irrespectively of their general perceptions ofneed satisfaction or of each other (as shown by the null or small
correlations between the need satisfaction ratings of two domains
or of two life episodes). These representations of need satisfaction
attached to a domain or to a speciﬁc past event are believed to be
primed by the environment when a person is engaged in the same
domain or is experiencing a similar situation (Philippe et al., 2012).
Such priming is expected to in turn inﬂuence the person’s situational experience of well-being when engaged in the domain or
in the speciﬁc situation. Over time, if this priming effect is frequently repeated in the person’s life and that consequently the person frequently experiences situational well-being, it should build
an enduring sense of well-being over time. This effect is similar
to exercising. If a person exercises once, then he or she will feelgreat immediately afterwards, but this effect will quickly disappear. However, if this person is to exercise three times a week
for several weeks, then this person would start to build enduringphysical resources (for a similar view see Fredrickson, 2001). Thus,a heterarchichal organization of need satisfaction could explain aperson’s increases in well-being in two ways: A ﬁrst way is throughthe stable perceptions of general need satisfaction. A second way isthrough the numerous repeated experiences of well-being derived
from frequently recalled need satisfaction in speciﬁc domains andpast life episodes.
Our ﬁndings on the role of need satisfaction across levels of
experience contrast with a recent perspective advanced by Sheldon,
Cheng, and Hilpert (2011), who posit that psychological needs(conceptualized at the global level) are the foundation of a multilevel model of personality such that all other aspects of personality(traits, goals, and sense of self) build on it. Although we do not dispute the role played by need satisfaction on traits, goals, and theself, we believe that needs can be considered separately as contributing to outcomes at each of these levels of personality or self,
rather than underlying all these levels. In other words, need satisfaction experienced at one level does not necessarily correspond toneed satisfaction experienced at another level. Our ﬁndings also
show that even within the same level, the need satisfaction experienced in a domain, for instance, does not correspond to the needsatisfaction experienced in a different domain. Thus, a person
could be experiencing need satisfaction in one domain and needthwarting in another domain, and similarly may be able to recall
speciﬁc instances of need satisfaction and need thwarting in eachdomain. It is this collection of separate levels of experience thatbuilds up the person’s general sense of self (herein the perceptionsof general need satisfaction), but that may also be likely to guidepeople’s thought and actions within particular domains orsituations.
Certain limitations regarding the present set of studies need to
be underscored. First, only correlational designs were used in thepresent studies and there is no way to conﬁrm the causality of
our results. Although Study 3’s design tested the prospective effectof need satisfaction at each level on well-being, there is still thepossibility that a third unknown variable explains the present ﬁndings. Another limitation of the present study is the limited focus on
the episodic level. In this paper, we only assessed episodic needsatisfaction in Study 3, and looked at only one episode per domain.
We thus do not know whether domain need satisfaction is built up
from multiple episodes in the same way as general need satisfaction is built up from multiple domains.
Overall, the present research provides consistent evidence thatdomain-speciﬁc and episodic need satisfaction contribute independently to well-being beyond a general sense of need satisfaction.
Although there was a substantial overlap between need satisfaction across the levels, this overlap was only partial, such that eachlevel remained relatively independent of the others and retained
unique predictive power, pointing to the importance of assessing
need satisfaction across multiple levels of experience. These ﬁndings contribute to our theoretical understanding of the relationshipbetween psychological need satisfaction and well-being and particularly the organization of need satisfaction across levels of experience. Furthermore, our demonstration that need satisfaction
follows a heterarchical rather than a hierarchical organization
across multiple levels may have broader implications for examining personality structure and its organization more generally.

References
Berntson, G. G., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). The neuroevolution of motivation. In J. Y.
Shah & W. L. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 188–200). New
York, NY: Guilford Press.

M. Milyavskaya et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 47 (2013) 41–51
Cohen, G. (2000). Hierarchical models in cognition: Do they have psychologicalreality? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 12(1), 1–36. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/095414400382181.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived
stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 386–396. http://dx.doi.org/
10.2307/2136404.
Conway, M. A., & Pleydell-Pearce, C. W. (2000). The construction of autobiographicalmemories in the self-memory system. Psychological Review, 107, 261–288.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.107.2.261.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New
York: Harper and Row.
Davis, M. H., Morris, M. M., & Kraus, L. A. (1998). Relationship speciﬁc and global
perceptions of social support: Associations with well-being and attachment.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 468–481. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/0022-3514.74.2.468.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Selfdetermination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 109–134.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘‘what’’ and ‘‘why’’ of goal pursuits: Humanneeds and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11,
227–268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychologicalwell-being across life’s domains. Canadian Psychology, 49, 14–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0708-5591.49.1.14.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Grifﬁn, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life
scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/
s15327752jpa4901_13.
Emmons, R. A. (1992). Abstract versus concrete goals: Personal striving level,
physical illness, and psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 62, 292–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.292.
Emmons, R. A. (1995). Levels and domains in personality: An introduction. Journalof Personality, 63, 341–364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1995.
tb00499.x.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The
broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56,
218–226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218.
Gagné, M. (2003). The role of autonomy support and autonomy orientation inprosocial behavior engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 199–223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1025007614869.
Guay, F., Vallerand, R. J., & Blanchard, C. M. (2000). On the assessment of situational
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The situational motivation scale(SIMS). Motivation and Emotion, 24, 175–213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:
1005614228250.
Heller, D., Watson, D., & Ilies, R. (2004). The role of person versus situation in life
satisfaction: A critical examination. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 574–600. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.4.574.
Ilardi, B. C., Leone, D., Kasser, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). Employee and supervisor ratingsof motivation: Main effects and discrepancies associated with job satisfaction andadjustment in a factory setting. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1789–1805.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1993.tb01066.x.
Kernis, M. H. (2005). Measuring self-esteem in context: The importance of stabilityof self-esteem in psychological functioning. Journal of Personality, 73,
1569–1605. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00359.x.
LaGuardia, J. G., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Within-person
variation in security of attachment: A self-determination theory perspective on
attachment, need fulﬁllment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 79, 367–384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.3.367.
Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness:
Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46,
137–155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1006824100041.
MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. New York:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Markus, H. R. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 63–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
0022-3514.35.2.63.

51

Marsh, H., Trautwein, U., Ludtke, O., Koller, O., & Baumert, J. (2006). Integration ofmultidimensional self-concept and core personality constructs: Constructvalidation and relations to well-being and achievement. Journal of Personality,74(2), 403–456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00380.x.
Marsh, H. W., & Yeung, A. S. (1998). Longitudinal structural equation models of
academic self-concept and achievement: Gender differences in thedevelopment of math and English constructs. American Educational Research
Journal, 35, 705–738. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1163464.
McAdams, D. P. (1995). What do we know when we know a person? Journal of
Personality, 63, 365–396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1995.tb00500.x.
McConnell, A. R. (2011). The multiple self-aspects framework: Self-concept
representation and its implications. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
15, 3–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1088868310371101.
Milyavskaya, M., & Koestner, R. (2011). Psychological needs, motivation, and wellbeing: A test of self-determination theory across multiple domains. Personality
andIndividual
Differences,50,
387–391.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.paid.2010.10.029.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2011). Mplus User’s Guide (6th ed.). Los
Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Patrick, H., Knee, C. R., Canevello, A., & Lonsbary, C. (2007). The role of need
fulﬁllment in relationship functioning and well-being: A self-determination
theory perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 434–457.
Peck, S. C. (2007). TEMPEST in a gallimaufry: Applying multilevel systems theory to
person-in-context research. Journal of Personality, 75(6), 1127–1156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00470.x.
Philippe, F. L., Koestner, R., Beaulieu-Pelletier, G., & Lecours, S. (2011). The role ofneed satisfaction as a distinct and basic psychological component of
autobiographical memories: A look at well-being. Journal of Personality, 79,905–938. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.14676494.2010.00710.
Philippe, F. L., Koestner, R., Beaulieu-Pelletier, G., Lecours, S., & Lekes, N. (2012).
The role of episodic memories in current and future well-being. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 505–519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
0146167211429805.
Pierce, T., & Lydon, J. E. (2001). Global and speciﬁc relational models in theexperience of social interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80,
613–631. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.80.4.613.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. M. (1997). On energy, personality and health: Subjective
vitality as a dynamic reﬂection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65, 529–565.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1997.tb00326.x.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 719–727. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719.
Schell, T. L., Klein, S. B., & Babey, S. H. (1996). Testing a hierarchical model of selfknowledge. Psychological Science, 7, 170–173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.14679280.1996.tb00351.x.
Schimmack, U. (2008). The structure of subjective wellbeing. In M. Eid & R. J. Larsen(Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp. 97–123). New York: Guilford.
Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of
construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407–441. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1170010.
Sheldon, K. M., Cheng, C., & Hilpert, J. (2011). Understanding well-being and optimalfunctioning: Applying the multilevel personality in context (MPIC) model.
Psychological Inquiry, 22, 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2011.532477.
Sheldon, K. M., & Gunz, A. (2009). Psychological needs as basic motives, not justexperiential requirements. Journal of Personality, 77, 1467–1492. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00589.x.
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology(pp. 271–360). New York: Academic Press.
Wood, D., & Roberts, B. W. (2006). Cross-sectional and longitudinal tests of thepersonality and role identity structural model (PRISM). Journal of Personality, 74,
779–809. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00392.x.