scispace - formally typeset

Journal ArticleDOI

The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior

01 Jan 2000-Psychological Inquiry (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.)-Vol. 11, Iss: 4, pp 227-268

AbstractSelf-determination theory (SDT) maintains that an understanding of human motivation requires a consideration of innate psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness. We discuss the SDT concept of needs as it relates to previous need theories, emphasizing that needs specify the necessary conditions for psychological growth, integrity, and well-being. This concept of needs leads to the hypotheses that different regulatory processes underlying goal pursuits are differentially associated with effective functioning and well-being and also that different goal contents have different relations to the quality of behavior and mental health, specifically because different regulatory processes and different goal contents are associated with differing degrees of need satisfaction. Social contexts and individual differences that support satisfaction of the basic needs facilitate natural growth processes including intrinsically motivated behavior and integration of extrinsic motivations, whereas those that forestall autonomy, competence, or relatedness are associated with poorer motivation, performance, and well-being. We also discuss the relation of the psychological needs to cultural values, evolutionary processes, and other contemporary motivation theories.

Topics: Self-determination theory (64%), Need theory (58%), Goal theory (57%), Fundamental human needs (55%), Cognitive evaluation theory (54%)

...read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This review considers research from both perspectives concerning the nature of well-being, its antecedents, and its stability across time and culture.
Abstract: ▪ Abstract Well-being is a complex construct that concerns optimal experience and functioning. Current research on well-being has been derived from two general perspectives: the hedonic approach, which focuses on happiness and defines well-being in terms of pleasure attainment and pain avoidance; and the eudaimonic approach, which focuses on meaning and self-realization and defines well-being in terms of the degree to which a person is fully functioning. These two views have given rise to different research foci and a body of knowledge that is in some areas divergent and in others complementary. New methodological developments concerning multilevel modeling and construct comparisons are also allowing researchers to formulate new questions for the field. This review considers research from both perspectives concerning the nature of well-being, its antecedents, and its stability across time and culture.

7,097 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: Cognitive evaluation theory, which explains the effects of extrinsic motivators on intrinsic motivation, received some initial attention in the organizational literature. However, the simple dichotomy between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation made the theory difficult to apply to work settings. Differentiating extrinsic motivation into types that differ in their degree of autonomy led to self-determination theory, which has received widespread attention in the education, health care, and sport domains. This article describes self-determination theory as a theory of work motivation and shows its relevance to theories of organizational behavior. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

5,066 citations


Cites background from "The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..."

  • ...…motivated behavior can become autonomous, together with research on individual differences in causality orientations (Deci & Ryan, 1985b), led to the formulation of self-determination theory (SDT) (Deci & Ryan, 1985a, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000), which incorporated CET but is much broader in scope....

    [...]

  • ...Specifically, Deci et al. (1994) found that a ‘meaningful rationale’ is one of the important factors that facilitates integrated internalization, and Latham, Erez, and Locke (1988) found that it facilitates goal acceptance....

    [...]

  • ...Many studies guided by SDT have provided support for this perspective (see Deci & Ryan, 2000, for a review)....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: This Special Issue is the result of the inaugural summit hosted by the Gallup Leadership Institute at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln in 2004 on Authentic Leadership Development (ALD). We describe in this introduction to the special issue current thinking in this emerging field of research as well as questions and concerns. We begin by considering some of the environmental and organizational forces that may have triggered interest in describing and studying authentic leadership and its development. We then provide an overview of its contents, including the diverse theoretical and methodological perspectives presented, followed by a discussion of alternative conceptual foundations and definitions for the constructs of authenticity, authentic leaders, authentic leadership, and authentic leadership development. A detailed description of the components of authentic leadership theory is provided next. The similarities and defining features of authentic leadership theory in comparison to transformational, charismatic, servant and spiritual leadership perspectives are subsequently examined. We conclude by discussing the status of authentic leadership theory with respect to its purpose, construct definitions, historical foundations, consideration of context, relational/processual focus, attention to levels of analysis and temporality, along with a discussion of promising directions for future research.

3,447 citations


Cites background from "The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..."

  • ...Most similar to our view is Ilies et al.’s (2005) model, the theoretical foundations of which are likewise anchored in part by the work of Kernis (2003) and Deci and Ryan (1995, 2000)....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: Building on and extending existing research, this article proposes a 4-phase model of interest development. The model describes 4 phases in the development and deepening of learner interest: triggered situational interest, maintained situational interest, emerging (less-developed) individual interest, and well-developed individual interest. Affective as well as cognitive factors are considered. Educational implications of the proposed model are identified.

2,635 citations


Cites background from "The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..."

  • ...In self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000), a person’s ability to satisfybasic psychological needs is a function of his or her valued outcomes, or goals. est for content (e.g., facilitation), then related new content, opportunities, or challenge provides additional…...

    [...]

  • ...…Linnebrink & Pintrich, 2000; Molden & Dweck, 2002; Pintrich, 2000), task value (Eccles et al., 1983; Wigfield & Eccles, 1992, 2002; Wigfield et al., 1997), self-efficacy (Bandura, 1986; Schunk, 1981; Zimmerman, 1989, 2000b), and intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000)....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is challenging to assess SWB across societies, the measures have some degree of cross-cultural validity and nations can be evaluated by their levels of SWB, there are still many open questions in this area.
Abstract: Subjective well-being (SWB), people's emotional and cognitive evaluations of their lives, includes what lay people call happiness, peace, fulfillment, and life satisfaction. Personality dispositions such as extraversion, neuroticism, and self-esteem can markedly influence levels of SWB. Although personality can explain a significant amount of the variability in SWB, life circumstances also influence long-term levels. Cultural variables explain differences in mean levels of SWB and appear to be due to objective factors such as wealth, to norms dictating appropriate feelings and how important SWB is considered to be, and to the relative approach versus avoidance tendencies of societies. Culture can also moderate which variables most influence SWB. Although it is challenging to assess SWB across societies, the measures have some degree of cross-cultural validity. Although nations can be evaluated by their levels of SWB, there are still many open questions in this area.

2,539 citations


Cites methods from "The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..."

  • ...An approach to SWB based on inherent and universal human needs is the Self-Determination Theory of Deci & Ryan (2000)....

    [...]


References
More filters

Book
01 Jan 1997
Abstract: Albert Bandura and the Exercise of Self-Efficacy Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control Albert Bandura. New York: W. H. Freeman (www.whfreeman.com). 1997, 604 pp., $46.00 (hardcover). Enter the term "self-efficacy" in the on-line PSYCLIT database and you will find over 2500 articles, all of which stem from the seminal contributions of Albert Bandura. It is difficult to do justice to the immense importance of this research for our theories, our practice, and indeed for human welfare. Self-efficacy (SE) has proven to be a fruitful construct in spheres ranging from phobias (Bandura, Jeffery, & Gajdos, 1975) and depression (Holahan & Holahan, 1987) to career choice behavior (Betz & Hackett, 1986) and managerial functioning (Jenkins, 1994). Bandura's Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control is the best attempt so far at organizing, summarizing, and distilling meaning from this vast and diverse literature. Self-Efficacy may prove to be Bandura's magnum opus. Dr. Bandura has done an impressive job of summarizing over 1800 studies and papers, integrating these results into a coherent framework, and detailing implications for theory and practice. While incorporating prior works such as Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977) and "Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency" (Bandura, 1982), Self-Efficacy extends these works by describing results of diverse new research, clarifying and extending social cognitive theory, and fleshing out implications of the theory for groups, organizations, political bodies, and societies. Along the way, Dr. Bandura masterfully contrasts social cognitive theory with many other theories of human behavior and helps chart a course for future research. Throughout, B andura' s clear, firm, and self-confident writing serves as the perfect vehicle for the theory he espouses. Self-Efficacy begins with the most detailed and clear explication of social cognitive theory that I have yet seen, and proceeds to delineate the nature and sources of SE, the well-known processes via which SE mediates human behavior, and the development of SE over the life span. After laying this theoretical groundwork, subsequent chapters delineate the relevance of SE to human endeavor in a variety of specific content areas including cognitive and intellectual functioning; health; clinical problems including anxiety, phobias, depression, eating disorders, alcohol problems, and drug abuse; athletics and exercise activity; organizations; politics; and societal change. In Bandura's words, "Perceived self-efficacy refers to beliefs in one's capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments" (p. 3). People's SE beliefs have a greater effect on their motivation, emotions, and actions than what is objectively true (e.g., actual skill level). Therefore, SE beliefs are immensely important in choice of behaviors (including occupations, social relationships, and a host of day-to-day behaviors), effort expenditure, perseverance in pursuit of goals, resilience to setbacks and problems, stress level and affect, and indeed in our ways of thinking about ourselves and others. Bandura affirms many times that humans are proactive and free as well as determined: They are "at least partial architects of their own destinies" (p. 8). Because SE beliefs powerfully affect human behaviors, they are a key factor in human purposive activity or agency; that is, in human freedom. Because humans shape their environment even as they are shaped by it, SE beliefs are also pivotal in the construction of our social and physical environments. Bandura details over two decades of research confirming that SE is modifiable via mastery experiences, vicarious learning, verbal persuasion, and interpretation of physiological states, and that modified SE strongly and consistently predicts outcomes. SE beliefs, then, are central to human self-determination. STRENGTHS One major strength of Self-Efficacy is Bandura's ability to deftly dance from forest to trees and back again to forest, using specific, human examples and concrete situations to highlight his major theoretical premises, to which he then returns. …

44,457 citations


"The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..." refers background or result in this paper

  • ...As for autonomy, Bandura (1989) stated that autonomy would be evident only if “humans serve as entirely independent agents of their own actions” (p....

    [...]

  • ...Social-learning theories, of which Bandura’s (1996) self-efficacy theory is currently the most popular, are examples of the so-called standard social science model (e.g., Tooby & Cosmides, 1992), for they view people’s behavioral repertoires and self-concepts as being largely acquired from the social world.Self-efficacy theory has focused specifically on the extent to which people feel capable of engaging in behaviors that will lead to desired outcomes (Bandura, 1977). Given their capacity to alter their environment, establish incentives, and create cognitive self-inducements, people can, Bandura (1989) argued, motivate themselves and be agentic....

    [...]

  • ...As for autonomy, Bandura (1989) stated that autonomy would be evident only if “humans serve as entirely independent agents of their own actions” (p. 1175), a characterization that allowed him to dismiss the concept out of hand. Clearly, this characterization bears no relation to the concept of autonomy contained in SDT and is inconsistent with the way the concept is treated by modern philosophers (e.g., Dworkin, 1988; Ricoeur, 1966). By using this characterization, self-efficacy theory has avoided dealing with the important human issue of autonomy. By contrast, other perceived control theories addressed the concept of autonomy and acknowledged that it cannot be reduced to perceived control (e.g., Little, Hawley, Henrich, & Marsland, in press; E. A. Skinner, 1995). In terms of our three needs, self-efficacy theory is concerned almost exclusively with competence, but the theory explicitly shuns White’s (1959) postulate of an innate effectance motivation....

    [...]

  • ...Although many empirically based theories treat motivation as a unitary concept, variable only in amount rather than kind (e.g., Bandura, 1996; Locke & Latham, 1990), our approach focuses on the kind of motivation or regulation—specifically, the degree to which it is self-determined versus…...

    [...]

  • ...Social-learning theories, of which Bandura’s (1996) self-efficacy theory is currently the most popular, are examples of the so-called standard social science model (e....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: An integrative theoretical framework to explain and to predict psychological changes achieved by different modes of treatment is presented and findings are reported from microanalyses of enactive, vicarious, and emotive mode of treatment that support the hypothesized relationship between perceived self-efficacy and behavioral changes.
Abstract: The present article presents an integrative theoretical framework to explain and to predict psychological changes achieved by different modes of treatment. This theory states that psychological procedures, whatever their form, alter the level and strength of self-efficacy. It is hypothesized that expectations of personal efficacy determine whether coping behavior will be initiated, how much effort will be expended, and how long it will be sustained in the face of obstacles and aversive experiences. Persistence in activities that are subjectively threatening but in fact relatively safe produces, through experiences of mastery, further enhancement of self-efficacy and corresponding reductions in defensive behavior. In the proposed model, expectations of personal efficacy are derived from four principal sources of information: performance accomplishments, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and physiological states. The more dependable the experiential sources, the greater are the changes in perceived selfefficacy. A number of factors are identified as influencing the cognitive processing of efficacy information arising from enactive, vicarious, exhortative, and emotive sources. The differential power of diverse therapeutic procedures is analyzed in terms of the postulated cognitive mechanism of operation. Findings are reported from microanalyses of enactive, vicarious, and emotive modes of treatment that support the hypothesized relationship between perceived self-efficacy and behavioral changes. Possible directions for further research are discussed.

36,878 citations


"The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..." refers background or result in this paper

  • ...As for autonomy, Bandura (1989) stated that autonomy would be evident only if “humans serve as entirely independent agents of their own actions” (p....

    [...]

  • ...Social-learning theories, of which Bandura’s (1996) self-efficacy theory is currently the most popular, are examples of the so-called standard social science model (e.g., Tooby & Cosmides, 1992), for they view people’s behavioral repertoires and self-concepts as being largely acquired from the social world.Self-efficacy theory has focused specifically on the extent to which people feel capable of engaging in behaviors that will lead to desired outcomes (Bandura, 1977). Given their capacity to alter their environment, establish incentives, and create cognitive self-inducements, people can, Bandura (1989) argued, motivate themselves and be agentic....

    [...]

  • ...As for autonomy, Bandura (1989) stated that autonomy would be evident only if “humans serve as entirely independent agents of their own actions” (p. 1175), a characterization that allowed him to dismiss the concept out of hand. Clearly, this characterization bears no relation to the concept of autonomy contained in SDT and is inconsistent with the way the concept is treated by modern philosophers (e.g., Dworkin, 1988; Ricoeur, 1966). By using this characterization, self-efficacy theory has avoided dealing with the important human issue of autonomy. By contrast, other perceived control theories addressed the concept of autonomy and acknowledged that it cannot be reduced to perceived control (e.g., Little, Hawley, Henrich, & Marsland, in press; E. A. Skinner, 1995). In terms of our three needs, self-efficacy theory is concerned almost exclusively with competence, but the theory explicitly shuns White’s (1959) postulate of an innate effectance motivation....

    [...]

  • ...Social-learning theories, of which Bandura’s (1996) self-efficacy theory is currently the most popular, are examples of the so-called standard social science model (e....

    [...]

  • ...Self-efficacy theory has focused specifically on the extent to which people feel capable of engaging in behaviors that will lead to desired outcomes (Bandura, 1977)....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Research guided by self-determination theory has focused on the social-contextual conditions that facilitate versus forestall the natural processes of self-motivation and healthy psychological development, leading to the postulate of three innate psychological needs--competence, autonomy, and relatedness.
Abstract: Human beings can be proactive and engaged or, alternatively, passive and alienated, largely as a function of the social conditions in which they develop and function. Accordingly, research guided by self-determination theo~ has focused on the social-contextual conditions that facilitate versus forestall the natural processes of self-motivation and healthy psychological development. Specifically, factors have been examined that enhance versus undermine intrinsic motivation, self-regulation, and well-being. The findings have led to the postulate of three innate psychological needs--competence, autonomy, and relatednesswhich when satisfied yield enhanced self-motivation and mental health and when thwarted lead to diminished motivation and well-being. Also considered is the significance of these psychological needs and processes within domains such as health care, education, work, sport, religion, and psychotherapy. T he fullest representations of humanity show people to be curious, vital, and self-motivated. At their best, they are agentic and inspired, striving to learn; extend themselves; master new skills; and apply their talents responsibly. That most people show considerable effort, agency, and commitment in their lives appears, in fact, to be more normative than exceptional, suggesting some very positive and persistent features of human nature. Yet, it is also clear that the human spirit can be diminished or crushed and that individuals sometimes reject growth and responsibility. Regardless of social strata or cultural origin, examples of both children and adults who are apathetic, alienated, and irresponsible are abundant. Such non-optimal human functioning can be observed not only in our psychological clinics but also among the millions who, for hours a day, sit passively before their televisions, stare blankly from the back of their classrooms, or wait listlessly for the weekend as they go about their jobs. The persistent, proactive, and positive tendencies of human nature are clearly not invariantly apparent. The fact that human nature, phenotypically expressed, can be either active or passive, constructive or indolent, suggests more than mere dispositional differences and is a function of more than just biological endowments. It also bespeaks a wide range of reactions to social environments that is worthy of our most intense scientific investigation. Specifically, social contexts catalyze both within- and between-person differences in motivation and personal growth, resulting in people being more self-motivated, energized, and integrated in some situations, domains, and cultures than in others. Research on the conditions that foster versus undermine positive human potentials has both theoretical import and practical significance because it can contribute not only to formal knowledge of the causes of human behavior but also to the design of social environments that optimize people's development, performance, and well-being. Research guided by self-determination theory (SDT) has had an ongoing concern with precisely these

26,488 citations


"The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Summary and Integration Self-determination theory is concerned primarily with explicating the psychological processes that promote optimal functioning and health (Ryan & Deci, 2000)....

    [...]

  • ...The dominance of behavior by unintegrated forces, such as external coercions and seductive rewards can thus preclude holistic processing (Kuhl & Fuhrmann, 1998) and self-coherence (Ryan & Deci, 2000)....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: The effects of reward or reinforcement on preceding behavior depend in part on whether the person perceives the reward as contingent on his own behavior or independent of it. Acquisition and performance differ in situations perceived as determined by skill versus chance. Persons may also differ in generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. This report summarizes several experiments which define group differences in behavior when Ss perceive reinforcement as contingent on their behavior versus chance or experimenter control. The report also describes the development of tests of individual differences in a generalized belief in internal-external control and provides reliability, discriminant validity and normative data for 1 test, along with a description of the results of several studies of construct validity.

20,553 citations


Book
01 Aug 1975
TL;DR: This chapter discusses the development of Causality Orientations Theory, a theory of personality Influences on Motivation, and its application in information-Processing Theories.
Abstract: I: Background.- 1. An Introduction.- 2. Conceptualizations of Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination.- II: Self-Determination Theory.- 3. Cognitive Evaluation Theory: Perceived Causality and Perceived Competence.- 4. Cognitive Evaluation Theory: Interpersonal Communication and Intrapersonal Regulation.- 5. Toward an Organismic Integration Theory: Motivation and Development.- 6. Causality Orientations Theory: Personality Influences on Motivation.- III: Alternative Approaches.- 7. Operant and Attributional Theories.- 8. Information-Processing Theories.- IV: Applications and Implications.- 9. Education.- 10. Psychotherapy.- 11. Work.- 12. Sports.- References.- Author Index.

19,762 citations


"The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..." refers background or methods or result in this paper

  • ...Like these other theories, self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1980, 1985b, 1991) has differentiated the concept of goal-directed behavior, yet it has taken a very different approach....

    [...]

  • ...In SDT, we refer to these ascausality orientations(Deci & Ryan, 1985a) at the broadest level of generality, and asregulatory styles(Ryan & Connell, 1989) at a more domain-specific level of generality (see also Vallerand, 1997)....

    [...]

  • ...Thus, it appears that the optimal circumstances for intrinsic motivation are those that allow satisfaction of the needs for autonomy and competence, circumstances that we labelinformational (Deci & Ryan, 1980, 1985b)....

    [...]

  • ...Our research (Deci & Ryan, 1985a) on causality orientations also showed that the impersonal orientation was associated with an external locus of control (i.e., the belief that one cannot control outcomes) and with self-derogation and depression, implying a negative relation to general well-being....

    [...]

  • ...In SDT, external regulation is considered controlling, and externally regulated behaviors are predicted to be contingency dependent in that they show poor maintenance and transfer once contingencies are withdrawn (Deci & Ryan, 1985b)....

    [...]