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

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...

Three field experiments with high school and college students tested the self-determination theory hypotheses that intrinsic (vs. extrinsic) goals and autonomy-supportive (vs. controlling) learning climates would improve students' learning, performance, and persistence. The learning of text material or physical exercises was framed in terms of intrinsic (community, personal growth, health) versus extrinsic (money, image) goals, which were presented in an autonomy-supportive versus controlling manner. Analyses of variance confirmed that both experimentally manipulated variables yielded main effects on depth of processing, test performance, and persistence (all ps <.001), and an interaction resulted in synergistically high deep processing and test performance (but not persistence) when both intrinsic goals and autonomy support were present. Effects were significantly mediated by autonomous motivation.

No abstract

No abstract