Source: https://www.sicotests.com/psyarticle.asp?id=440
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 19:18:29+00:00

Document:
According to cognitive evaluation theory (Deci, 1975), people are sometimes intrinsically motivated to complete tasks. That is, they feel that some tasks are inherently enjoyable, challenging, or significant. They do not merely feel obliged to complete these activities. When individuals feel intrinsic motivation, they tend to be more persistent. Burnout and exhaustion typically diminish.
In contrast, people are sometimes extrinsically motivated to complete tasks. That is, they complete these tasks merely to secure some reward or benefit. When individuals feel extrinsically motivated, their persistence and wellbeing declines.
Some activities, although originally motivated extrinsically, might eventually evoke feelings of autonomy and enhance persistence. This evolution from extrinsic motivation to autonomy unfolds only if the basic psychological needs of individuals are fulfilled (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
In particular, initially individuals might learn to introject a behavior that was initially motivated extrinsically (see Ryan & Connell, 1989). To illustrate, suppose employees receive a bonus each time they convince a customer to purchase a car. Initially, these employees might merely encourage customers to purchase a vehicle to receive this bonus, reflecting extrinsic motivation. Over time, they begin to internalize this behavior, feeling a sense of pride after engaging in this act and guilt or shame otherwise, reflecting introjection. At this stage, individuals do not experience a sense of ownership over the principle to promote cars, but feel they should engage in this act anyway.
Over time, individuals might learn to identify with this behavior, rather than merely introject. For instance, they might perceive or identify themselves as a person who sells cars effectively. As a consequence, they feel motivated to engage in this behavior, primarily to align with this identity.
Finally, individuals might integrate this inclination with other facets of their self concept. For example, they might not only identify themselves with a person who sells cars effectively, but this identity becomes assimilated and integrated seamlessly with their other self perceptions. Behavior feels increasingly more autonomous as individuals shift from extrinsic motivation and introjection through to identification and finally integration.
Integration still departs from intrinsic motivation, however. Integration still coincides with an instrumental outcome and, thus, is not inherently interesting, satisfying, enjoyable, or fulfilling.
According to this conceptualization, called organismic integration theory, individuals can experience a sense of autonomy even when behaviors are extrinsically rewarded. The distinction between autonomous and controlled motivation, therefore, seemed more important than was the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Organismic integration theory is one of the five key principles of self-determination theory (Vansteenkiste, Niemiec, & Soenens, 2010).
If people report an autonomous rather than a control motivation, they tend to be more cooperative rather than opportunistic during commercial interactions. This relationship was uncovered by Sakalaki and Fousiani (2011). In their first study, to assess autonomous versus controlled orientation, participants completed the General Causality Orientation Scale. In addition, they completed the Economic Opportunism Scale to assess cooperation instead of opportunistic or competitive behavior. Sample items include "When you apply for health insurance, it's not wrong to keep quiet about some health problems so as to keep the premium down" and "When you sell a used car, you are obliged to tell the potential buyer about the car's defects" (reverse scored). Autonomy orientation was inversely associated with economic opportunism.
Indeed, to confirm this result, a subsequent study examined whether an autonomous orientation coincided with actual cooperation, rather than defection, during a trust game (see games). This hypothesis was indeed confirmed.
Another study showed that such economic opportunism was negatively associated with psychological wellbeing. That is, if participants conceded they were competitive during these economic transactions, they were not as likely to experience vitality or self-actualization but more likely to experience anxiety.
Presumably, when individuals do not feel their behavior is governed by their own values, but instead experience a control orientation, they can more readily blame undesirable behavior on other sources, such as the social environment. Furthermore, because they cannot access their own values as readily, they focus more on their immediate enjoyment, often provoking expedient behavior.
When individuals seem to be granted limited autonomy, they do not feel energized by their fundamental inclinations and motivations. Instead, they feel mechanical rather than sentient, experiencing a form of dehumization. Because of this sense of dehumanization, they do not feel as responsible for immoral actions, increasing the likelihood of violent or inappropriate behaviour (Moller & Deci, 2009).
Moller and Deci (2009) undertook a study to confirm that autonomy can reduce this sense of dehumanization. First, participants completed a measure that assesses whether or not they demonstrate an autonomous, controlled, or impersonal orientation. That is, some people are motivated to engage in tasks that seem challenging, significant, and enjoyable, called an autonomous orientation. Other people are motivated to engage in tasks that attract rewards and respect, called a controlled orientation. Finally, some people feel that whether or not they realize their objectives depends on factors that transcend their control, called an impersonal orientation. Furthermore, participants also completed a scale that assesses whether or not they feel their fundamental needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness have been fulfilled.
Next, participants completed a questionnaire that assesses whether they perceive themselves, or other humans, as mechanistic. That is, pairs of circles were presented, each overlapping to varying degrees. Participants indicated the pair that represents the degree to which they feel the concept of themselves overlaps with machines. They also indicated the pair that represents the degree to which they feel other people overlaps with machines. Finally, measures of aggression, such as level of anger and hostility, were administered.
Individuals who reported an autonomous orientation, instead of a controlled or impersonal orientation, were more likely to feel their identity overlaps with machines: They felt dehumanized. This sense of dehumanization was also associated with various indices of aggression and anger.
An autonomous motivation also facilitates emotional expression--which in turn promotes emotional regulation and wellbeing. For example, in a study conducted by Weinstein and Hodgins (2009), participants watched a distressing video about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Participants who reported an autonomous rather than controlled orientation, demonstrating a tendency to be interested and engaged rather than compelled by imperatives and incentives, were more likely to express their emotions when granted an opportunity to write about their experience. In addition, priming a sense of autonomy was also more likely to demonstrate this tendency to express emotions. In particular, they referred to their personal feelings and states more often, coupled with abstract, cognitive concepts rather than concrete details--which reflects adaptive emotional processing.
Hodgins, Weibust, Weinstein, Shiffman, Miller, Coombs, and Adair (2010) showed that an autonomous motivation, relative to a controlled motivation, enhances the resilience of individuals in threatening situations. Specifically, in this study, participants were monitored during a stressful interview and subsequent speech. In particular, during the interview, participants received 15 threatening questions, such as "Describe a time in which you felt less attractive than a friend". That is, these questions threatened the identity or integrity of individuals. They also answered some questions that were not threatening. After the interview, they presented a speech, intended to persuade someone to attend their college.
The behavior and physiology of these participants were monitored throughout these stressful tasks. For example, the extent to which they expressed defensive remarks was assessed. Fake and genuine smiling was recorded. Vocal characteristics were assessed. Heart rate and blood pressure were monitored as well. The structure, content, and applicability of their speech was also judged. In addition, before these stressful tasks, an autonomous or controlled motivation was induced, using the sentence unscrambling task.
Consistent with the hypotheses, when an autonomous motivation, rather than controlled motivation, was induced, participants showed more resilience. For example, when the questions became more threatening, a controlled motivation was associated with more fake smiles and physiological indices of stress. An autonomous motivation, however, was not associated with these manifestations of stress. The autonomous motivation also enhanced performance on the speech task.
According to Hodgins, Weibust, Weinstein, Shiffman, Miller, Coombs, and Adair (2010), when individuals experience an autonomous motivation, an integrated network of self representations are primed. Discrepant or threatening information is integrated within this extensive network of self beliefs. In contrast, when individuals experience a controlled motivation, more fragile self representations are primed. To preserve these fragile representations, individuals attempt to defend themselves from threatening information, evoking a series of defense mechanisms (see also Hodgins, 2008& Hodgins & Knee, 2002).
In short, an autonomous, rather than controlled, orientation seems to curb defensive processing. Specifically, if individuals often experience an autonomous orientation, all of their behaviors, decisions, and choices are governed by their personal inclinations or preferences. As a consequence, their actions, attitudes, beliefs, and other cognitions are likely to be consistent with one another, rather than divergent--called self integration. Their attitudes towards themselves evolves from these integrated reprsentations and thus tend to be consistent over time, called a true self esteem (see Deci & Ryan, 1995).
Specifically, according to Deci and Ryan (1995), individuals feel a fundamental need to experience autonomy, competence, and relatedness. When all these needs are fulfilled, individuals develop the capacity to explore and master their environment as well as internalize cultural values and practices to seek meaning and connection, ultimately improving their wellbeing.
When individuals pursue these core needs, they feel worthy--they feel this true high self esteem. Deci and Ryan (1995) maintain that individuals do not seek this true high self esteem& this state emerges naturally and effortlessly. This form of self esteem is independent of success and represents an expression of core needs.
When some of these fundamental needs are not pursued, however, individuals do not experience this true high self esteem. They will, therefore, attempt to seek other opportunities to improve their state. In particular, they will strive to fulfill some artificial standard of excellence rather than pursue their core needs (Deci & Ryan, 1995).
Thus, if individuals often experience a controlled motivation, their behaviors, decisions, and choices are often governed by other pressures and incentives--usually distinct from their personal needs, inclinations, and preferences. These pressures and incentives vary across contexts. Their actions, attitudes, and other cognitions will often contradict one another over time, which precludes self integration. Their attitudes towards themselves, thus, also varies across different contexts, called a contingent self esteem (see Deci & Ryan, 1995).
When they succeed, their self esteem will rise& when they fail, their self esteem will decline. Their attitude towards themselves is thus unstable over time and contingent upon unsustainable success. This self esteem is thus fragile, demanding continuous validation (see also optimal self esteem).
Because their self esteem does not reflect their entire gamut of integrated experiences, these individuals devote effort into directing their attention towards the subsets of domains or activities in which they prevail. That is, they attempt to divert their attention from failures, dismiss the importance of shortfalls, or reject criticisms about their behavior. As a consequence, a controlled orientation is associated with defensiveness (Hodgins, Yacko, & Gottlieg, 2006). Furthermore, the implicit self esteem of these individuals tends to be low (Hodgins, Brown, & Carver, 2007).
These defensive responses tend to compromise emotional regulation. Upsetting, disturbing, and distressing experiences are not integrated with other representations or perceptions of the self. Hence, these negative experiences penetrate conscious awareness, vividly and repetitively, in at attempt to facilitate this integration (for a description of this process, see Lyubormirsky, Souse, & Dickerhoof, 2006& Weinstein & Hodgins, 2009).
Some conditions or environments foster or support autonomy. According to proponents of self-determination theory, the environments that support autonomy enable everyone to feel like a separate individual, able to choose their own course of action. Specifically, people feel the environment supports their autonomy whenever other individuals acknowledge and inquire about their feelings or perspectives, justify their requests meaningfully, and offer choices (e.g., Grolnick, 2003& Ryan, 2005). Environments that foster support, called autonomy supportive, are not devoid of structure or involvement from leaders (Joussemet et al. 2008). And people are not treated as pawns to be controlled (Deci & Ryan, 1987).
Koestner, Powers, Carbonneau, Milyavskaya, and Chua (2012) explored the behaviors that foster an autonomous motivation in other people. They showed that people who adopt the perspective of other people and show empathy tend to foster an autonomous motivation in other individuals, such as romantic partners or friends. This autonomous motivation, in turn, facilitates progress towards goals.
In the first study, romantic couples from a university completed questionnaires each week or so over a month. They specified an academic, health, relationship, and friendship goal they would like to achieve during the semester, such as "receive a 3.7 GPA". Next, they indicated the degree to which their partner shows empathy, called autonomy support, or offers guidance, called directive support. Sample items for each facet of support include "I feel that my partner understands how I see things with respect to my goals" and "My partner helps me problem solve about my goals" to gauge autonomy support and directive support respectively. In addition, they indicated the degree to which they feel intrinsic motivation or autonomy when they pursue these goals as well as the extent to which they feel they have progressed on these goals.
As predicted, autonomy support, primarily epitomized by perspective taking and empathy, was related to an autonomous or intrinsic motivation, which in turn coincided with goal progress. Factor analyses differentiated autonomy support and directive support. Most of the items that measured autonomy support concerned the degree to which individual felt their partner understood their needs, listened carefully, demonstrated confidence in them, and encouraged openness and disclosure. The second study replicated this pattern of results, but with friends instead of romantic partners. The same pattern of findings was also observed when participants were asked to identify goals they had not set themselves but had been imposed by someone else.
Many studies have shown that autonomy support from supervisors encourages wellbeing in individuals. Moreau and Mageau (2011), however, showed that autonomy support from peers is also positively associated with wellbeing and work satisfaction in health professionals, even after controlling autonomy support from supervisors.
In this study, the participants were newcomers in medicine, veterinary medicine, and dentistry. They completed a measure that gauges the autonomy support that both their supervisors and colleagues provide. To gauge autonomy support, the questions related to the degree to which individuals felt the other people granted them choice (e.g., "Within certain limits, colleagues give me the freedom to choose how and when I will execute my tasks"), communicated the rationale for requests (e.g., "When my supervisors ask me to do something, they explain why they want me to do it"), and inquired about their feelings or perspectives (e.g., "My colleagues take the time to listen to my opinion and my point of view when I disagree with them"). In addition, the degree to which these supervisors and colleagues engaged in controlling behaviors, including imposing orders, inducing guilt, communicating threats, and manipulating people with rewards, was assessed. Furthermore, the degree to which individuals felt satisfied at work, intent to leave, satisfied with life, depressed, and anxious were measured as well. Finally, the extent to which they have been exposed to stressful life events and experience suicidal ideation was evaluated.
Autonomy support from colleagues was positively associated with work satisfaction and life satisfaction but negatively related to intent to leave, depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation, even after controlling exposure to stress. Even after autonomy support from supervisors was controlled, autonomy support from colleagues was still related to work satisfaction and life satisfaction. Accordingly, autonomy support can be provided by people in egalitarian, instead of hierarchical, relationships.
Duncan, Hall, Wilson, and Rodgers (2012) showed that individuals could engage in mental imagery to foster integrated regulation, in which individuals feel some behavior, such as exercise, is an important part of who they are. For example, in one study, participants completed a guided mental imagery to increase the extent to which exercise was integrated with their sense of self. They were instructed to imagine themselves arriving at a gym, preparing their exercise, warming up, completing the workout, and cooling down. At the same time, they imagined feelings and thoughts that epitomized integrated regulation, such as "You feel like you belong" and "You feel like an exerciser". In the control condition, participants heard about the benefits of exercise.
Participants, all of whom were female, engaged in an eight week program. Across the eight weeks, participants who were exposed to the guided imagery instructions were more likely than participants who were informed about the benefits of exercise to experience integrated regulation. They were, for example, more likely to endorse statements such as "I participate in exercise because it has become a fundamental part of who I am".
According to self determination theory, individuals are more likely to experience a sense of autonomous motivation, ultimately optimizing wellbeing and progress, if their basic psychological needs are fulfilled. (Ryan & Deci, 2000). That is, all humans experience a profound need to feel autonomous, competent, and related to other individuals (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Some contexts facilitate the achievement of these fundamental psychological needs. These contexts, according to self determination theory, facilitate internalization and integration and thus foster autonomous motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Hence, contexts that promote autonomy, competence, and relationships will ultimately inflate the likelihood of autonomous motivation. For example, behaviors that are endorsed in some context, and are thus extrinsically motivated, will eventually be integrated if individuals feel connected and related to the individuals in this setting.
Several studies have characterized the contexts that afford this sense of autonomy and thus promote integration. To establish these contexts, referred to as autonomy supportive, authority figures, such as parents, managers, and teachers, should relate uninteresting activities to core values, acknowledge the feelings and perspectives of the individual, provide sufficient information, and offer some sense of choice (Deci, Eghrari, Patrick, & Leone, 1994). These supportive conditions enhance autonomy and wellbeing in many contexts (Williams & Deci, 1996& Williams, Levesque, Zeldman, Wright, & Deci, 2003).
As Weinstein, Przybylski, and Ryan (2009) showed, exposure to nature can also increase the likelihood that individuals experience a sense of autonomy and pursue intrinsic, rather than extrinsic, goals. In one study, for example, individuals were exposed to slides that depict either urban environments, such as a city building, or natural environments, such as a canyon. If exposed to natural environments, participants experienced a greater a sense of autonomy, endorsing items like "Right now, I feel like I can be myself". Furthermore, they regarded community and relationships as more important than fame and fortune. Similar benefits were observed when plants were included in the surroundings.
In particular, according to Weinstein, Przybylski, and Ryan (2009), nature is inherently interesting and thus directs the attention of individuals towards their immediate environment. As a consequence, individuals do not feel their behavior is governed by obligations& a sense of autonomy thus evolves. They become more inclined to pursue personal aspirations in lieu of money, recognition, and power.
When individuals complete an act that is compatible with subliminal cues, such as after they press the right of two buttons after subliminally exposed to the word right, they experience a strong sense of agency. That is, they feel they chose to initiate this action. This sense of fit or compatibility evokes a sense of agency. In contrast, when individuals complete an act that is compatible with some visible or loud demand, their sense of agency diminishes.
These possibilities were substantiated by Damen, Van Baaren, and Dijksterhuis (2014). In one study, a series of X-es appeared on the screen. After these letters appeared, participants pressed either a left or right button. When the left button was pressed, a high tone was played. When the right button was pressed, a lower tone was played. Once participants heard the tone, they were asked to indicate, on a 100 point scale, the extent to which they felt they had caused this sound to be emitted. Importantly, before some of the X-es, the word left or right appeared, either subliminally or visibly.
If the button that participants pressed diverged from the subliminal word--for example, whenever the subliminal word was right but participants pressed the left button--they felt they did not cause this sound. Their sense of agency diminished. In contrast, if the button that participants pressed diverged from the visible word, they felt they did cause this sound. Agency was restored.
Presumably, actions that align to subliminal primes instil a sense of fit that facilitates processing. Participants do not feel hampered, and thus feel they chose their actions. In contrast, actions that align to visible primes may provoke a different reaction: Individuals may feel they were coerced into this behavior.
Individuals might experience a sense of autonomy, which promotes intrinsic motivation, when they feel independent. Nevertheless, independence does not always equate with autonomy (Deci a& Ryan, 2008). For example, some individuals might feel obliged to act independently, assuming that such behavior will be regarded as appropriate. Alternatively, some individals might feel obliged to act independently because they do not trust anyone else. In these instances, the tendency to act independently represents a form of control, not autonomy, volition, and choice.
As Legault and Inzlicht (2013) showed, the benefits of an autonomous motivation are partly mediated by larger error rated negativity, an event related potential or brainwave that emanates from the anterior cingulate cortex and indicates the environment diverges from goals or expectations, ultimately facilitating self-control. This finding implies that an autonomous motivation increases the tendency of individuals to accept or acknowledge problems and improve discipline.
For example, in one study, participants first completed a measure that gauges whether they tend to experience an autonomous or controlled motivation. For example, they were asked whether, while reflecting on a new job, they consider interest and challenge, indicating an autonomous motivation, or opportunities to advance, indicating more of a controlled motivation. Next, they completed the Go-No Go task, in which they needed to press a button whenever M appeared on a monitor and not to press a button whenever W appeared. On most trials, M appeared and participants needed to press a button. Inhibiting themselves from pressing the button when W appeared, therefore, demanded self-control. While completing this task, EEG was measured.
In general, participants who reported an autonomous motivation demonstrated better self-control on the Go-No Go task& they inhibited responses to W more effectively. Furthermore, when they committed errors, the error-related negativity potential, a deflection that is detected between 50 ms and 150 ms after the response and recorded at the frontocentral midline, was especially strong in amplitude. This result was replicated when autonomous motivation was manipulated by providing autonomy supportive or autonomy unsupportive conditions.
These findings are consistent with the notion that autonomy increases the openness of individuals to negative feedback (Hodgins & Liebeskind, 2003) and diminishes their tendency to become defensive and deny the problem. That is, when autonomous, people feel motivated to develop their capabilities on this important task and, thus, accept negative feedback--feedback that is represented by the error rated negativity.
Several measures differentiate the various motivations--intrinsic, identified, introjected, and extrinsic, for example--in specific domains. The Behavioral Regulations in Exercise Questionnaire, for example, was developed and validated by Mullan, Markland, and Ingledew (1997). This scale comprises 15 questions. The stem for each question is "Why do you exercise?" Four of the questions assess extrinsic or external motivation (e.g., "I exercise because other people say I should"). Three of the items correspond to introjected motivation (e.g., "I feel guilty when I don't exercise"). Four of the items reflect identified motivation (e.g., "I value the benefits of exercise"). Finally, four of the items correspond to intrinsic motivation (e.g., "I exercise because it's fun"). Test-retest reliability over a week ranged from .76 to .90 for the four subscales.
Adelberg, S., & Batson, C. D. (1978). Accountability and helping: When needs exceed resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 343-350.
Amabile, T. M., DeJong, W., & Lepper, M. (1976). Effects of externally imposed deadlines onsubsequent intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 92-98.
Ambrose, M. L., Arnaud, A., & Schminke, M. (2008). Individual moral development and ethical climate: The influence of person-organization fit on job attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 77, 323-333.
Amos, E. A., & Weathington, B. L. (2008). An analysis of the relation between employee-organization value congruence and employee attitudes. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 142, 615-631.
Ariely, D. (2009). Predictably irrational: The hidden forces that shape our decisions. London: Harper.
Atkinson, J. W. (1964). An introduction to motivation. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
Burgess, M., Enzle, M. E., & Schmaltz, R. (2004). Defeating the potentially deleterious effects of externally imposed deadlines. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 868-877.
Cameron, J., & Pierce, W. D. (1994). Reinforcement, reward, and intrinsic motivation: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 64, 363-423.
Carbonneau, N., Vallerand, R. J., & Massicotte, S. (2010). Is the practice of yoga associated with positive outcomes? The role of passion. Journal of Positive Psychology, 5, 452-465.
Carnevale, P., Pruitt, D., & Seilheimer, S. (1981). Looking and competing: Accountability and visual access in integrative bargaining. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 111-120.
Chang, L., Shih, C., & Lin, S. (2010). The mediating role of psychological empowerment on job satisfaction and organizational commitment for school health nurses: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47, 427-433.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The empowerment process: integrating theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 13, 471-482.
De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2009). Volition and reasons for accepting temporary employment. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 17, 363-387.
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human autonomy: The basis for true self-esteem. In M. Kernis (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 31-49). New York: Plenum Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and the "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across life's domains. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49, 14-23.
Deci, E. L., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B. C., & Leone, D. R. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality, 62, 119-142.
Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., Gagne, M., Leone, D. R., Usunov, J., & Kornazheva, B. P. (2001). Need satisfaction, motivation, and well-being in the work organizations of a former Eastern Bloc country. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 930-942.
Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A. J., Sheinman, L., & Ryan, R. M. (1981). An instrument to assess adults' orientations toward control versus autonomy with children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 642-650.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
Fernet, C., Guay, F., & Senecal, C. (2004). Adjusting to job demands: The role of work self-determination and job control in predicting burnout. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 39-56.
Filak, V. & Sheldon, K. M. (2003). Student psychological need-satisfaction and college teacher-course evaluations. Educational Psychology, 23, 235-247.
Filak, V. & Sheldon, K. M. (2008). Teacher support, student motivation, student need satisfaction, and college teacher course evaluations: Testing a sequential path model. Educational Psychology, 28, 711-724.
Frey, B. S. (1997). Not just for the money: An economic theory of personal motivation. Cheltenham, UK: Elgar.
Frey, B. S. (2001). Inspiring economics: Human motivation in political economy. Cheltenham, UK: Elgar.
Gagne, M. (2003). The role of autonomy support and autonomy orientation in prosocial behavior engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 199- 223.
Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 73-96.
Green, M. C., Visser, P. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (2002). Coping with accountability cross-pressures: Low effort evasive tactics and high-effort quests for complex compromises. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11, 1380-1391.
Greene, D., & Lepper, M. R. (1974). Effects of extrinsic rewards on children's subsequent intrinsic interest. Child Development, 45, 1141-1145.
Greguras, G. J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009). Different fits satisfy different needs: Linking person-environment fit to employee commitment and performance using self-determination theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 465-477.
Grolnick, W. S. (2003). The psychology of parental control: How well meant parenting backfires. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Publishers.
Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with children's self-regulation and competence in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 143-154.
Gropel, P. &, Kuhl, J. (2009). Work-life balance and subjective well-being: The mediating role of need fulfillment. British Journal of Psychology, 100, 365-375.
Hall, A. T., Frink, D. D., Ferris, G. R., Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J., & Bowen, M. G. (2003). Accountability in human resources management. In C. A. Schriesheim & L. L. Neider (Eds.), New directions in human resources management (pp. 29-63). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Hall, A. T., Royle, M. T., Brymer, R. A., Perrewe, G. R., Ferris, G. R., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2006). Relationships between felt accountability as a stressor and strain reactions: The neutralizing role of autonomy across two studies. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, 87-99.
Harackiewicz, J. M. (1979). The effects of reward contingency and performance feedback on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1352-1363.
Hepburn, A., & Brown, S. (2001). Teacher stress and the management of accountability. Human Relations, 54, 691-715.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, 111-127.
Hodgins, H. S. (2008). Motivation, threshold for threat, and quieting the ego. In H. Wayment & J. Bauer (Eds.), Transcending self interest: Psychological explorations of the quiet ego (pp. 117-124). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hodgins, H. S., Brown, A. B., & Carver, B. (2007). Autonomy and control motivation and self-esteem. Self and Identity, 6, 189-208.
Hodgins, H. S., & Knee, C. R. (2002). The integrating self and conscious experience. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 87-100). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Hodgins, H. S., & Liebeskind, E. (2003). Apology versus defense: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 297-316.
Hodgins, H. S., Liebeskind, E., & Schwartz, W. (1996). Getting out of hot water: Facework in social predicaments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 300-314.
Hodgins, H. S., Weibust, K. S., Weinstein, N., Shiffman, S., Miller, A., Coombs, G.,& Adair, K. C. (2010). The cost of self-protection: threat response and performance as a function of autonomous and controlled motivations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1101-1114.
Hodgins, H. S., Yacko, H., & Gottlieb, E. (2006). Autonomy and nondefensiveness. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 283-293.
Hoffman, B. J., & Woehr, D. J. (2006). A quantitative review of the relationship between person-organization fit and behavioral outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 389-399.
Huang, X., Iun, J., Liu, A., & Gong, Y. (2010). Does participative leadership enhance work performance by inducing empowerment or trust? The differential effects on managerial and non-managerial subordinates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 122-143.
Huang, Y., Wang, L., & Shi, J. (2009). When do objects become more attractive? The individual and interactive effects of choice and ownership on object evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 713-722.
Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of work design literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1332-1356.
Joussemet, M., Landry, R., & Koestner, R. (2008). A self-determination theory perspective on parenting. Canadian Psychology, 49, 194-200.
Kasser, T. & Sheldon, K. M. (2009). Material and time affluence as predictors of subjective well-being. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 243-255.
Kasser, T., & Ahuvia, A. (2002). Materialistic values and well-being in business students. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 137-146.
Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1996). Further examining the American dream: Differential correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 280-287.
Klar, M., & Kasser, T. (2010). Some benefits of being an activist: measuring activism and its role in psychological well-being. Psychological Science, 30, 755-777.
Koberg, C. S., Boss, R. W., Senjem, J. C., & Goodman, E. A. (1999). Antecedents and outcomes of empowerment: Empirical evidence from the health care industry. Group and Organization Management, 24, 71-91.
Koestner, R., Ryan, R. M., Bernieri, F., & Holt, K. (1984). Setting limits on children's behavior: The differential effects of controlling versus informational styles on intrinsic motivation and creativity. Journal of Personality, 52, 233-248.
Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49, 1-49.
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Jansen, K. J., & Colbert, A. E. (2002). A policy-capturing study of the simultaneous effects of fit with jobs, groups, and organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 985-993.
Kristof-Brown, A., Barrick, M. R., & Franke, M. (2002). Applicant impression management: Dispositional influences and consequences for recruiter perceptions of fit and similarity. Journal of Management, 28, 27-46.
Laird, M. D., Perryman, A. A., Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., & Zinko, R. (2009). The moderating effects of personal reputation on accountability-strain relationships. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 70-83.
Larson, D. G., & Chastain, R. L. (1990). Self-concealment: Conceptualization, measurement, and health implications. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9, 439-455.
Legault, L., Green-Demers, I., Grant, P., & Chung, J. (2007). On the self-regulation of implicit and explicit prejudice: A self-determination theory perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 732-749.
Lepper, M. R., & Greene, D. (eds.) (1978). The hidden costs of reward: New perspectives on the psychology of human motivation. Hillsdale, NY: Erlbaum.
Liden, R., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2000). An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 407-416.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press.
Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., & Earley, P. C. (1990). Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 952-959.
Lind, E. A., Kulik, C. T., Ambrose, M., & De Vera-Park, M. V. (1993). Individual and corporate dispute resolution: Using procedural fairness as a decision heuristic. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 224-251.
Lloyd, R. (2008). Discretionary effort and the performance domain. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Organisational Psychology, 1, 22-34.
Loveland, K. K., & Olley, J. G. (1979). The effect of external reward on interest and quality of task performance in children of high and low intrinsic motivation. Child Development, 50, 1207-1210.
Lund, O. C. H., Tamnes, C. K., Moestue, C., Buss, D. M., & Vollrath, M. (2007). Tactics of hierarchy negotiation. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 25-44.
Matarazzo, K. L., Durik, A. M., & Delaney, M. L. (2010). The effect of humorous instructional materials on interest in a math task. Motivation and Emotion, 34, 293-305.
Moller, A. C., & Deci, E. L. (2009). Interpersonal control, dehumanization, and violence: A self-determination theory perspective. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, 41-53.
Morgan, M. (1981). The overjustification effect: A developmental test of self perception interpretations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 809-821.
Morgan, M. (1983). Decrements in intrinsic motivation among rewarded and observer subjects. Child Development, 54, 636-644.
Mullan, E., Markland, D., & Ingledew, D. K. (1997). A graded conceptualization of selfdetermination in the regulation of exercise behavior: Development of a measure using confirmatory factor analytic procedures. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 745-752.
Niessen, C., & Volmer, J. (2010). Adaptation to increased work autonomy: The role of task reflection. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19, 442-460.
Orpen, C. (2000). The interactive effects of role uncertainty and accountability on employees use of upward influence tactics. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 37, 2-4.
Ostroff, C., & Schulte, M. (2007). Multiple perspectives of fit in organizations across levels of analysis. [References]. In C. Ostroff & T. A. Judge (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational fit (pp. 3-69). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Ostroff, C., Shin, Y., & Kinicki, A. J. (2005). Multiple perspectives of congruence: Relationships between value congruence and employee attitudes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 591-623.
Page, S. (2006). The web of managerial accountability: The impact of reinventing government. Administration & Society, 38, 166-197.
Pelletier, L. G., Dion, S. C., Slovinec-D'Angelo, M., & Reid, R. (2004). Why do you regulate what you eat? Relationships between forms of regulation, eating behaviors, sustained dietary behavior change and psychological adjustment. Motivation and Emotion, 28, 245-277.
Pelletier, L. G., Fortier, M. S., Vallerand, R. J., & Briere, N. M. (2001). Associations among perceived autonomy support, forms of self-regulation, and persistence: A prospective study. Motivation and Emotion, 25, 279-306.
Perry, D. G., Bussey, K., & Redman, J. (1977). Reward-induced decreased play effects: Reattribution of motivation, competing responses, or avoid frustration? Child Development, 48, 1369-1374.
Piasentin, K. A., & Chapman, D. S. (2007). Perceived similarity and complementarity as predictors of subjective person-organization fit. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 341-354.
Pieterse, A. N., Van Knippenberg, D., Schippers, M., & Stam, D. (2010). Transformational and transactional leadership and innovative behavior: The moderating role of psychological empowerment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 609-623.
Plant, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and the effects of self-consciousness, self-awareness, and ego-involvement: An investigation of internally controlling styles. Journal of Personality, 53, 435-449.
Quinn, R. E., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1997). The road to empowerment: seven questions every leader should consider. Organizational Dynamics, 26, 37-49.
Quoidbach, Dunn, E. W., Petrides, K. V., & Mikolajczak, M. (2010). Money giveth, money taketh away: The dual effect of wealth on happiness. Psychological Science, 21, 759-763.
Reis, H. T., Sheldon, K. M., Gable, S. L., Roscoe, R., & Ryan, R. (2000). Daily well being: The role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 419-435.
Riketta, M., & Landerer, A. (2002). Organizational commitment, accountability, and work behavior: A correlational study. Social Behavior and Personality, 30, 653-660.
Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 450-461.
Ryan, R. M. (2005). The developmental line of autonomy in the etiology, dynamics, and treatment of borderline personality disorders. Development and Psychopathology, 17, 987- 1006.
Ryan, R. M., & Solky, J. A. (1996). What is supportive about social support? On the psychological needs for autonomy and relatedness. In G.R. Pierce & B. R. Sarason (Eds.), Handbook of social support and the family: Plenum series on stress and coping (pp. 249-267). New York: Plenum.
Ryan, R. M., Koestner, R., & Deci, E. L. (1991). Ego-involved persistence: When freechoice behavior is not intrinsically motivated. Motivation and Emotion, 15, 185-205.
Ryan, R. M., Mims, V., & Koestner, R. (1983). Relation of reward contingency and interpersonal context to intrinsic motivation: A review and test using cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 736-750.
Ryan, R. M., Rigby, S., & King, K. (1993). Two types of religious internalization and their relations to religious orientations and mental health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 586-596.
Schlegel, R. J., Hicks, J. A., Arndt, J., & King, L. A. (2009). Thine own self: True self-concept accessibility and meaning in life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 473-490.
Sheldon, K. M. (1995). Creativity and self-determination in personality. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 61-72.
Sheldon, K. M. (2008). Assessing the sustainability of goal-based changes in well-being over a four-year period. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 223-229.
Sheldon, K. M. & Bettencourt, B. A. (2002). Psychological needs and subjective well-being in social groups. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 25-38.
Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1998). Not all personal goals are "personal": Comparing autonomous and controlling goals on effort and attainment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 546-557.
Sheldon, K. M., & Filak, V. (2008). Manipulating autonomy, competence, and relatedness in a game-learning context: New evidence that all three needs matter. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 267-283.
Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (1998). Pursuing personal goals: Skills enable progress but not all progress is beneficial. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 546-557.
Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (2008). Psychological threat and goal striving. Motivation and Emotion, 32, 37-45.
Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., & Reis, H. (1996). What makes for a good day? Competence and autonomy in the day and in the person. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1270-1279.
Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., & Kasser, T. (2004). The independent effects of goal contents and motives on well-being: It's both what you pursue and why you pursue it. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 475-486.
Sheldon, K., Williams, G. C., & Joiner, T. (2003). Self-determination theory in the clinic: Motivating physical and mental health. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Siegall, M., & Gardner, S. (2000). Contextual factors of psychological empowerment. Personnel Review, 29, 703-722.
Siegel-Jacobs, K., & Yates, J. F. (1996). Effects of procedural and outcome accountability on judgment quality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 1-17.
Silvia, P. J. (2003). Self-efficacy and interest: Experimental studies of optimal incompetence. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62, 237-249.
Silvia, P. J. (2005). What is interesting? Exploring the appraisal structure of interest. Emotion, 5, 89-102.
Sims Jr., H.P., Szilagyi, A.D., & Keller, R.T. (1976). The measurement of job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 19, 195-211.
Sims, R. L., & Keon, T. L. (1997). Ethical work climate as a factor in the development of person-organization fit. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 1095-1105.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Individual empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1442-1465.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 483-504.
Spreitzer, G. M., Kizilos, M. A., & Nason, S. W. (1997). A multidimensional analysis of the relationship between psychological empowerment, and effectiveness, satisfaction, and strain. Journal of Management, 23, 679-705.
Tan, H., & Tan, C. (2002). Temporary employees in Singapore. What drives them? Journal of Psychology, 136, 83-102.
Tang, S., & Hall, V. C. (1995). The overjustification effect: A meta-analysis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 365-404.
Tetlock, P. (1983). Accountability and the perseverance of first impressions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46, 74-83.
Tetlock, P. (1985). Accountability: The neglected social context of judgment and choice. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 297-332). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Thomas, K. W., & Tymon, W. G., Jr. (1994), Does empowerment always work: Understanding the role of intrinsic motivation and personal interpretation. Journal of Management Systems, 6, 1-13.
Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: an 'interpretive' model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15, 666-681.
Thoms, P., Dose, J. J., & Scott, K. S. (2002). Relationships between accountability, job satisfaction, and trust. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13, 307-323.
Uysal, A., Lin, H. L., & Knee, C. R. (2009). The role of need satisfaction in self concealment and wellbeing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 187-199.
Vallerand, R. J. , Blanchard, C. M. , Mageau, G. A. , Koestner, R., Ratelle, C. F., Lonard, M., Marsolais, J. et al. (2003). Les passions de l'me: On obsessive and harmonious passion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85 ,756-767.
Van den Bos, K. (2001). Uncertainty management: The influence of human uncertainty on reactions to perceived fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 931-941.
Van den Bos, K. (2003). On the subjective quality of social justice: The role of affect as information in the psychology of justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 482-498.
Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2002). Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 1-60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Van den Bos, K., & Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2001). Referent cognitions theory: The psychology of voice depends on closeness of reference points. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 616-626.
van Prooijen, J. (2009). Procedural justice as autonomy regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1166-1180.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Motivation learning, performance and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 246-260.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Soenens, B., & Matos, L. (2005). Examining the impact of extrinsic versus intrinsic goal framing and internally controlling versus autonomy-supportive communication style on early adolescents' academic achievement. Child Development, 76, 483-501.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Soenens, B., & Lens, W. (2004). How to become a persevering exerciser? Providing a clear, future intrinsic goal in an autonomy supportive way. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 26, 232-249.
Verquer, M. L., Beehr, T. A., & Wagner, S. H. (2003). A meta-analysis of relations between person-organization fit and work attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 473-489.
Weinstein, N., & Hodgins, H. S. (2009). The moderating role of autonomy and control on the benefits of written emotion expression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 351-364.
Wiechman, B. M., & Gurland, S. T. (2009). What happens during the free-choice period? Evidence of a polarizing effect of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 716-719.
Williams, G. C., Cox, E., Kouides, R., & Deci, E. L. (1999). Presenting the facts about smoking to adolescents: The effects of an autonomy supportive style. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 153, 959-964.
Williams, G. C., Freedman, Z. R., & Deci, E. L. (1998). Supporting autonomy to motivate patients with diabetes for glucose control. Diabetes Care, 21, 1644-1651.
Williams, G. C., Gagne, M., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). Facilitating autonomous motivation for smoking cessation. Health Psychology, 21, 40-50.
Williams, G. C., Grow, V. M., Freedman, Z. R., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1996). Motivational predictors of weight loss and weight loss maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 115-126.
Williams, G. C., Levesque, C. S., Zeldman, A., Wright, S., & Deci,E. L. (2003). Health care practitioners' motivation for tobacco dependence counseling. Health Education Research, 18, 538-553.
Williams, G. C., McGregor, H. A., Sharp, D., Levesque, C., Kouides, R. W., & Ryan, R. M.et al. (2006). Testing a self-determination theory intervention for motivating tobacco cessation: Supporting autonomy and competence in a clinical trial. Health Psychology, 25, 95-101.
Williams, G. C., McGregor, H. A., Zeldman, A., Freedman, Z. R., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Testing a self-determination theory process model for promoting glycemic control through diabetes self-management. Health Psychology, 23, 58-66.
Williams, G. C., Minicucci, D. M., Kouides, R. M., Levesque, C. S., Chirkov, V. I., & Ryan, R. M.et al. (2002). Self-determination, smoking, diet, and health. Health Education Research, 17, 512-521.
Williams, G. C., Rodin, G. C., Ryan, R. M., Grolnick, W. S., & Deci, E. L. (1998). Autonomous regulation and long-term medication adherence in adult outpatients. Health Psychology, 17, 269-276.

References: V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V.