Predicting Psychological Needs and Well‐Being of Individuals Engaging in Weight Management: The Role of Important Others

TLDR: The findings indicate that the quality of interactions between individuals engaged in weight management and their significant others matters in terms of predicting the psychological needs and well-being of the former.

Abstract: Background: Using the self-determination theory (SDT) framework, we examined how significant others might support or thwart psychological needs of people with weight management goals, and in turn might affect their psychological well-being and weight control behaviors. Design: Longitudinal design with three sets of questionnaires administered over a 6-month period. Methods: One hundred and fifty-six eligible participants (age = 31.01 13.21 years) were asked to complete questionnaires of SDT-based constructs, weight management behaviors, and psychological well-being. Hypotheses were tested using Bayesian path analysis. Results: Perceived autonomy support from significant others was related to psychological need satisfaction, while controlling behaviors by others were associated with need thwarting. In turn, need satisfaction was associated with some beneficial outcomes such as life satisfaction, and need thwarting was related to some maladaptive outcomes such as higher levels of depressive symptoms and increases in unhealthy diet behaviors. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that the quality of interactions between individuals engaged in weight management and their significant others matters in terms of predicting the psychological needs and well-being of the former.

Figures

Figure 2. Path model with reference to diet (n = 91). SDT variables are measured at T2; the outcomes are measured at T3. Scores of healthy and unhealthy diet behaviors are controlled for their T1 scores, but are not presented for presentation simplicity purposes. Standardized estimates are shown, and the corresponding 95% credibility intervals are presented in square brackets. Paths whose 95% credibility intervals do not

Table 1 Descriptive Statistics and Internal Reliability Coefficients of All Measured Variables

Figure 1. Path model with reference to exercise (n = 129). SDT variables are measured at T2; the outcomes are measured at T3. Standardized estimates are shown, and the corresponding 95% credibility intervals are presented in square brackets. Paths whose 95% credibility intervals do not encompass zero are indicated by solid lines.

Full text

Running head: PREDICTING PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS AND WELL-BEING 1
Ng, J. and Ntoumanis, N. and Thogersen-Ntoumani, C. and Stott, K. and Hindle, L. 2013. Predicting
1
Psychological Needs and Well-Being of Individuals Engaging in Weight Management: The Role of
2
Important Others. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being. 5 (3): pp. 291-310.
3
Predicting Psychological Needs and Well-Being of Individuals Engaging in Weight
4
Management: The Role of Important Others
5
Abstract
6
Background. Using the self-determination theory (SDT) framework, we examined how
7
significant others might support or thwart psychological needs of people with weight
8
management goals, and in turn might affect their psychological well-being and weight control
9
behaviors.
10
Design. Longitudinal design with three sets of questionnaires administered over a six-month
11
period.
12
Methods. 156 eligible participants (age = 31.01 ± 13.21 years) were asked to complete
13
questionnaires of SDT-based constructs, weight management behaviors, and psychological
14
well-being. Hypotheses were tested using Bayesian path analysis.
15
Results. Perceived autonomy support from significant others was related to psychological
16
need satisfaction, while controlling behaviors by others were associated with need thwarting.
17
In turn, need satisfaction was associated with some beneficial outcomes such as life
18
satisfaction, and need thwarting was related to some maladaptive outcomes such as higher
19
levels of depressive symptoms and increases in unhealthy diet behaviors.
20
Conclusions. Our findings indicate that the quality of interactions between individuals
21
engaged in weight management and their significant others matters in terms of predicting the
22
psychological needs and well-being of the former.
23
24
Keywords: psychological needs; autonomy support; controlling behaviors;
25
psychological well-being; Bayesian path analysis
26
27

Running head: PREDICTING PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS AND WELL-BEING 2
Predicting Psychological Needs and Well-being of Individuals Engaging in Weight
1
Management: The Role of Important Others
2
Overweight and obesity were identified by the World Health Organization (2011) as
3
risk factors for non-communicable diseases such as cardiovascular illnesses and type II
4
diabetes. In 2009, more than 60% of the UK population was classified as overweight or obese
5
(OECD, 2011). This percentage is predicted to increase, and as a result, health care costs
6
associated with related diseases is estimated to rise by £2 billion per year (Wang, McPherson,
7
Marsh, Gortmaker, & Brown, 2011). Although local governments, universities, and
8
commercial companies have developed weight loss or maintenance (referred to as weight
9
management hereafter) programs to address the problem of overweight and obesity, research
10
has shown that attrition rates from these programs is rather high (Gill et al., 2012). Adherence
11
to weight management behaviors, such as regular physical activity and a healthy diet, is
12
imperative to successful weight loss or maintenance. In the current study, we examined how
13
important others support or undermine engagement in these behaviors. Rather than examining
14
the quantity of support provided, we were interested in how different types of support by
15
significant others satisfy or thwart key psychological needs and subsequently lead to
16
contrasting outcomes. To this end, self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 2000) was
17
chosen as an appropriate framework for this study.
18
Self-determination Theory
19
Proposed by Deci and Ryan (1985, 2000), SDT provides a conceptual framework to
20
explain both antecedents and consequences of personal motivation. Researchers have utilized
21
SDT to study health-related behaviors, including weight management (for a recent meta-
22
analysis, see Ng et al., 2012). Empirical research in this area has been influenced by Ryan,
23
Patrick, Deci, and Williams’ (2008) model which is an application of basic needs theory, one
24
of the mini-theories of SDT, to the health-related contexts. Using the model, Ryan et al.
25

Running head: PREDICTING PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS AND WELL-BEING 3
described how contextual factors (e.g., perceived behaviors of others) may enhance
1
individuals’ satisfaction of three basic psychological needs. These are the need for autonomy
2
(i.e., being the origin of one’s behavior), competence (i.e., feeling effective), and relatedness
3
(i.e., perception of being cared for by others). In turn, psychological need satisfaction leads to
4
improved physical and psychological well-being, and promotes health-conducive behaviors
5
including physical activity and a healthier diet.
6
Within SDT, one important antecedent of need satisfaction is an individual’s
7
perception of received autonomy support from the social environment. Autonomy support is
8
characterized by behaviors such as provision of choices, meaningful rationale for task
9
engagement, and acknowledgment of negative feelings (Deci & Ryan, 1987). In support of
10
the tenets of SDT, Williams, Grow, Freedman, Ryan, and Deci (1996) found that
11
participants’ perceived autonomy support by health-care providers was associated with
12
participants’ autonomous motivation (doing a behavior for enjoyment or its valued outcomes)
13
for weight loss, which in turn predicted attendance to a 6-month weight loss program, weight
14
loss during the program, and maintenance of weight loss at a 23-month follow-up. In another
15
study, Williams et al. (2006) found that participants’ perceived autonomy support from
16
important others predicted autonomy and competence need satisfaction and lower fat and
17
calorie intake five months later. Similarly, Silva et al. (2010) found that in a group of female
18
participants attempting to lose weight, autonomy support by instructors predicted autonomy
19
and competence need satisfaction, and in turn autonomous motivation and more physical
20
activity.
21
In contrast to being autonomy supportive, Ryan and Deci (2000) also posited that the
22
social environment can be controlling and thwart psychological need satisfaction, leading to
23
low behavioral adherence and ill-being. Controlling behaviors, such as the use of contingent
24
rewards, intimidation, and conditional acceptance have been found to thwart the needs of
25

Running head: PREDICTING PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS AND WELL-BEING 4
autonomy, competence, and relatedness, and lead to ill-being in the context of sport
1
(Bartholomew, Ntoumanis, Ryan, Bosch, & Thøgersen-Ntoumani, 2011; Bartholomew,
2
Ntoumanis, Ryan, & Thøgersen-Ntoumani, 2011). Studies in the sport domain have
3
suggested that need satisfaction and thwarting may be orthogonal constructs, and that
4
psychological need thwarting is not equivocal to low levels of need satisfaction (e.g.,
5
Bartholomew, Ntoumanis, Ryan, & Thøgersen-Ntoumani, 2011). The evidence from this line
6
of work suggests that need thwarting is a stronger predictor of ill-being and maladaptive
7
behaviors, whereas need satisfaction is a stronger predictor of well-being and adaptive
8
behaviors. In our current study we assessed simultaneously both need satisfaction and need
9
thwarting.
10
Previous research has also examined the effects of having social support from
11
important others on weight management outcomes. For instance, Wing and Jeffery (1999)
12
found that participants who received support from friends or family members, compared to
13
those who did not have the same support, had better adherence to a weight loss treatment
14
program and were more successful in maintaining their weight loss. In contrast, Beverly,
15
Miller, and Wray (2008) found that excessive control by spouses may lead to lower self-
16
control, or perceived lack of support in patients diagnosed with type II diabetes. From a SDT
17
perspective, it is not only the extent of support by significant others (e.g., spouse, offspring,
18
close friend) that matters but also the nature of that support (autonomy supportive vs.
19
controlling). For instance, an individual could have a big network of family and friends
20
supporting her weight management regime (i.e., having high levels of social support), yet
21
these significant others may not provide her with choices or meaningful rationales (i.e.,
22
autonomy support), but instead try to support her by exerting pressure (i.e., being controlling).
23
As explained earlier, autonomy support and controlling support from significant others
24
differentially predicts psychological needs, motivation, and behavioral/emotional investment
25

Running head: PREDICTING PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS AND WELL-BEING 5
of individuals undertaking a weight management program.
1
The Current Study
2
The purpose of this study was to examine how important others’ autonomy supportive
3
and controlling behaviors might predict individuals’ psychological need
4
satisfaction/thwarting when engaged in weight management. Also, we investigated how
5
psychological needs predict changes in exercise and diet behaviors, and psychological
6
well/ill-being over a six-month period. Using a longitudinal design, we tested a SDT-based
7
model of weight management. The current study extends the SDT literature in a few ways.
8
First, previous studies have examined the effects of perceived autonomy support on weight
9
management outcomes and behaviors. However, no studies have looked at how controlling
10
behaviors of important others may also affect these outcomes. In their meta-analysis, Ng et al.
11
(2012) found only one study which measured controlling behaviors in relation to health-
12
related outcomes. According to Ryan and Deci (2000), these behaviors may have detrimental
13
consequences in terms of health outcomes. Hence, it is important to assess such behaviors in
14
health-related studies examining social interactions. Further, this is the first study within a
15
weight management context that has simultaneously examined the effects of adaptive (e.g.,
16
need satisfaction) and maladaptive (e.g., need thwarting) factors at the level of psychological
17
needs. The construct of need thwarting has not been previously examined within a context of
18
weight management, but was found to be related to outcomes such as depressive symptoms
19
and disordered eating in athletes (Bartholomew, Ntoumanis, Ryan, Bosch, et al., 2011). Thus,
20
our study advances previous literature by simultaneously examining multiple adaptive and
21
maladaptive motivational factors at both the contextual and personal level.
22
In the current study, we specifically looked at the influence of the most prominent
23
important other nominated by each participant. This is because Rouse, Ntoumanis, Duda,
24
Jolly, and Williams (2011) showed that different important others can have differential
25

Frequently asked questions

Q1. What contributions have the authors mentioned in the paper "Running head: predicting psychological needs and well-being" ?

Using the self-determination theory ( SDT ) framework, the authors examined how 7 significant others might support or thwart psychological needs of people with weight 8 management goals, and in turn might affect their psychological well-being and weight control 9 behaviors. 

Q2. What have the authors stated for future works in "Running head: predicting psychological needs and well-being" ?

These factors could be measured in 2 future research as they might influence mean levels of physical activity. Future research may incorporate daily diary measures for 11 both exercise and diet behaviors. Future studies 24 may examine whether these variables might mediate the relations between need 25 satisfaction/thwarting and weight management behaviors. In the current study, the authors only asked participants to report behaviors of one important 8 other ; future research may examine how outcomes may differ when participants interact in 9 their weight management efforts with important others with conflicting interpersonal styles. 

Q3. What did the authors find in their study?

In their study the authors found that when participants perceived more autonomy support 22 from their important other, their psychological needs were satisfied. 

Q4. How many measures of autonomy were included in the T2 questionnaire?

Their T2 questionnaire included 19 measures of perceived autonomy support, controlling behaviors, need satisfaction, and need 20 thwarting. 

Q5. What did the authors hypothesize that need satisfaction would predict?

The authors hypothesized that need satisfaction 20 (thwarting) would predict increases (decreases) in adaptive weight management behaviors 21 and psychological well-being outcomes. 

Q6. How many participants completed the second set of questionnaires?

In terms of responses with respect to physical activity and diet 4 behaviors, the authors received 129 responses in reference to exercise, and 91 in reference to diet (i.e., 5 64 participants completed questionnaires in reference to both exercise and diet). 

Q7. Why did the authors conduct the path analyses using the Bayesian approach?

17The authors conducted path analyses using the Bayesian approach to test their hypotheses 19 because this approach was found to produce more accurate evaluations of model fit and 20 parameter estimates when sample sizes are small or when the assumption of normality is 21 violated (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2010; Lee & Song, 2004). 

Q8. What is the reason for the lack of prediction of exercise and healthy diet behaviors?

The self-reported nature of weight management behaviors of participants is also a 4 limitation of the study and might be a possible reason for the lack of prediction of exercise 5 behaviors and healthy diet behaviors. 

Q9. What is the way to assess the fit of a model?

A model is deemed well-fitting if its corresponding PPC-χ2 confidence interval 4 encompasses 0, or equivalently has a Posterior Predictive p-value between .05 and .95 5 (Gelman et al., 2004). 

Q10. What is the significance of the constructs in the study?

Previous work in this context has not examined these 12 constructs which, according to Ryan and Deci (2000), have important repercussions for 13 psychological health and can result in experiences of ill-being. 

Q11. How many times did participants engage in strenuous exercise?

21 participants were asked to report the number of times they engaged in strenuous (e.g., 22 running), moderate (e.g., brisk walking), and mild exercise (e.g., golf) for at least 15 minutes 23 in the last seven days. 

Q12. What are the other constructs used in the study?

In addition to other SDT constructs, behavior intentions (based on the 20 theory of planned behavior; Conner, Norman, & Bell, 2002) and self-regulation cognitions 21 (based on self-regulation theory; Kalavana, Maes, & De Gucht, 2010) were found in previous 22 studies to predict behaviors related to weight management. 

Q13. What is the main reason why people become more susceptible to temptations?

10 Finally, research has shown that low need satisfaction may cause participants to become more 11 susceptible to temptations (Schüler & Kuster, 2011). 

Q14. How many participants were recruited from fitness centers?

15 Method 16 Participants and Procedures 17 Participants were recruited from community settings in the United Kingdom using 18 posters at fitness centers and messages sent through electronic mailing lists. 

Q15. What is the significance of the construct of need thwarting?

The construct of need thwarting has not been previously examined within a context of 18 weight management, but was found to be related to outcomes such as depressive symptoms 19 and disordered eating in athletes (Bartholomew, Ntoumanis, Ryan, Bosch, et al., 2011).