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

Humans have a potential for growth, integration, and well-being, while also being vulnerable to defensiveness, aggression, and ill-being. Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000b) argues that satisfaction of the basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness both fosters immediate well being and strengthens inner resources contributing to subsequent resilience, whereas need frustration evokes ill-being and increased vulnerabilities for defensiveness and psychopathology. We briefly review recent research indicating how contextual need support and the experience of need satisfaction promote well-being and different growth manifestations (e.g., intrinsic motivation, internalization), as well as a rapidly growing body of work relating need thwarting and need frustration to ill-being, pursuit of need substitutes, and various forms of maladaptive functioning. Finally, we discuss research on differences in autonomous self-regulation and mindfulness, which serve as factors of resilience.

No abstract

The present research complements extant variable-centered research that focused on the dimensions of autonomous and controlled motivation through adoption of a person-centered approach for identifying motivational profiles. Both in high school students (Study 1) and college students (Study 2), a cluster analysis revealed 4 motivational profiles: a good quality motivation group (i.e., high autonomous, low controlled); a poor quality motivation group (i.e., low autonomous, high controlled); a low quantity motivation group (i.e., low autonomous, low controlled); and a high quantity motivation group (i.e., high autonomous, high controlled). To compare the 4 groups, the authors derived predictions from qualitative and quantitative perspectives on motivation. Findings generally favored the qualitative perspective; compared with the other groups, the good quality motivation group displayed the most optimal learning pattern and scored highest on perceived need-supportive teaching. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.Keywords: motivational profiles, autonomous motivation, controlled motivation, self-determination theory, quality of motivation Most motivation psychologists, teachers, and parents would agree that students' study behavior is multidetermined. Multiple reasons might drive study behavior, such as a spontaneous interest in the learning material, a desire to prove oneself by getting high grades, external expectations, or future professional goals. Nevertheless, some motives might be more dominant for some students, whereas different motives might be of greater importance to others. Also, some students might combine some motives in a relatively unique manner, so that they, for instance, study both because they need to meet external demands and because they find learning enjoyable as such. Thus, different groups or types of students might exist that are characterized by different motivational profiles.To identify motivational profiles, one must adopt a personcentered approach (Magnusson, 1998). Such an approach complements the dimensional or variable-centered approach that is typically used in motivational research (but see Csizér & Dörnyei, 2005;Pintrich, 2000; Ratelle, Guay, Vallerand, Larose, & Senécal, in press;Wang & Biddle, 2001). Whereas the primary aim in person-centered analyses (e.g., cluster analysis; Gore, 2000) is to categorize individuals into groups whose members have similar motivational profiles, the focus of the variable-centered approach is on the effects of motivational dimensions on students' learning and performance. The two approaches are likely to yield complementary information (Fortunato & Goldblatt, 2006), but little prior attention has been devoted to the person-centered approach by motivational researchers. Our aims in the present research were (a) to map out the motivational profiles of students on the basis of their scores for autonomous and controlled study motivation, as distinguished within self-determination theory (SDT; Vansteenkiste, Lens, & De...

The study of basic psychological needs has witnessed a strong revival, in part spurred by Basic Psychological Need Theory (BPNT), one of the six mini-theories within Self-Determination Theory. Empirical studies on BPNT have increased exponentially since the millennium turn, leading to refinements and extensions in theory. In this contribution we review these two decades of research in order to introduce two special issues on BPNT. We first discuss key criteria that define and identify a basic need within BPNT. We then review several need-relevant themes, highlighting advancements and trends that characterize contemporary research on BPNT. Specifically, we address potential extensions of the shortlist of basic psychological needs, the role of psychological need frustration in increasing vulnerability to maladjustment, the study of the interface between individuals' psychological and physical needs (e.g., sleep, sex, hunger), novel insights into critical need-supportive and need-thwarting practices, and the universality (versus variability) of effects of need satisfactions and supports across demographics, psychological characteristics, and cultural contexts. We also situate each of the 19 contributions that appear in this special double-issue on BPNT within these themes, while suggesting avenues for further research on the role of basic psychological needs in motivation, adjustment, and wellness.