The present study investigated whether satisfaction and frustration of the psychological needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence, as identified within Basic Psychological Need Theory (BPNT; Deci and Ryan, Psychol Inquiry 11:227-268, 2000; Ryan and Deci, Psychol Inquiry 11:319-338, 2000), contributes to participants' well-being and ill-being, regardless of their cultural background and interpersonal differences in need strength, as indexed by either need valuation (i.e., the stated importance of the need to the person) or need desire (i.e., the desire to get a need met). In Study 1, involving late adolescents from Belgium and China (total N = 685; Mean age = 17 years), autonomy and competence satisfaction had unique associations with well-being and individual differences in need valuation did not moderate these associations. Study 2 involved participants from four culturally diverse nations (Belgium, China, USA, and Peru; total N = 1,051; Mean age = 20 years). Results provided evidence for the measurement equivalence of an adapted scale tapping into both need satisfaction and need frustration. Satisfaction of each of the three needs was found to contribute uniquely to the prediction of well-being, whereas frustration of each of the three needs contributed uniquely to the prediction of ill-being. Consistent with Study 1, the effects of need satisfaction and need frustration were found to be equivalent across the four countries and were not moderated by individual differences in the desire for need satisfaction. These findings underscore BPNT's universality claim, which states that the satisfaction of basic needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence represent essential nutrients for optimal functioning across cultures and across individual differences in need strength

No abstract

Based on self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), an experimental study with middle school students participating in a physical education task and a correlational study with highly talented sport students investigated the motivating role of positive competence feedback on participants' well-being, performance, and intention to participate. In Study 1, structural equation modeling favored the hypothesized motivational model, in which, after controlling for pretask perceived competence and competence valuation, feedback positively predicted competence satisfaction, which in turn predicted higher levels of vitality and greater intentions to participate, through the mediation of autonomous motivation. No effects on performance were found. Study 2 further showed that autonomous motivation mediated the relation between competence satisfaction and well-being, whereas a motivation mediated the negative relation between competence satisfaction and ill-being and rated performance. The discussion focuses on the motivational role of competence feedback in sports and physical education settings.

Relatively little research drawing from self-determination theory has examined the links between controlling teaching environments and student motivation. To this end, two longitudinal studies were conducted to explore how students’ perceptions of controlling teaching behavior and experiences of psychological need frustration were associated with a number of motivation-related outcomes over a school year. Multilevel growth modelling indicated that changes in perceptions of controlling teaching positively related to changes in need frustration across the school year (Studies 1 & 2) which, in turn, negatively related to autonomous motivation and positively related to controlled motivation and amotivation in Study 1 (N = 419); and positively related to fear of failure, contingent self-worth, and challenge avoidance in Study 2 (N = 447). Significant indirect effects also supported the mediating role of need frustration. These findings reinforce the need for research on the negative motivational pathways which link controlling teaching to poor quality student motivation. Implications for teacher training are discussed

In recent research on psychologically controlling parenting, debate has arisen about the cross‐cultural relevance of this construct, with some scholars arguing that the developmental outcomes of psychological control are culture‐bound and others arguing that the detrimental effects of psychological control generalize across cultures. This study aimed to add to this debate by examining the relevance of a distinction between two domain‐specific expressions of psychological control (i.e., dependency‐oriented and achievement‐oriented) in Belgian (N = 290) and South‐Korean (N = 321) adolescents. Multi‐group path analyses showed that associations between the domains of psychological control, depressive personality, and depressive symptoms were similar between the two samples. Overall, the findings are in line with the notion that the effects of psychological control generalize across culture.

An important recent development in the achievement goal literature is to define achievement goals strictly as aims. In this overview, we argue that this restrictive definition of achievement goals paves the way for a systematic consideration of the autonomous and controlled reasons underlying individuals' achievement goals, a distinction central to Self-Determination Theory.To stimulate work in this area, we formulated five propositions, arguing that consideration of the "why" (i.e., type of reasons) in addition to the "what" (i.e., type of aims) of achievement goals, (a) provides an account for the regulatory basis of achievement goals, (b) opens the door for other motivation theories to be linked to the achievement goal literature, (c) matters in terms of predicting outcomes, (d) allows for a richer account of contextual forces influencing motivation, and (e) sets the stage for an enriched hierarchical model of achievement motivation. In closing, we discuss various future research directions. Towards a Systematic Examination of the Autonomous and Controlled Reasons Underlying Achievement GoalsThe literature on achievement goals has burgeoned over the past 30 years. By relying on cross-sectional, longitudinal, and experimental methodologies, scholars in diverse domains, including education, sport, and work, have documented the correlates and effects of different types of achievement goals (Elliot, 2005;Hulleman, Schrager, Bodmann, & Harackiewicz, 2010; Kaplan & Maehr, 2007; Murayama, Elliot, & Friedman, 2011; Van Yperen, Blaga, & Postmes, in press). The aim of the present contribution is to review recent empirical work that has just begun to systematically consider people's underlying reasons for adopting and pursuing achievement goals. Vansteenkiste, Niemiec, & Soenens, 2010). SDT is a well-validated theory, which has a long tradition of examining the reasons underlying individuals' activity engagement and thus proved ideally suited to theorize about and examine the reasons underlying individuals' achievement goal pursuit. Within SDT, it is maintained that these reasons can vary in their level of autonomy and volition relative to control and pressure. When learners' achievement goal pursuit is controlled regulated, they feel pressured, either from the outside or from within, to pursue and attain particular achievement goals. Instead, when learners' achievement goal pursuit is autonomously regulated, they have either fully endorsed the goal or they experience the goal pursuit as inherently satisfying and challenging. To illustrate, when taking an entrance exam at the beginning of college, learners could feel pressured by their parents 3 Reasons underlying Achievement Goals (i.e., controlled reason) to outperform their peers (i.e., performance-approach goal) or they could more willingly pursue the goal of doing better than their peers because they foresee the personal benefits of doing so (i.e., autonomous reason). Similarly, due to time constraints, learners could feel pressured (i.e., controlled rea...

Autonomous and controlling reasons underlying achievement goals could further explain learners' functioning in achievement settings.

No abstract