The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior
Citations
8,243 citations
5,816 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)....
[...]
3,866 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)....
[...]
3,066 citations
Cites background from "The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..."
...pleasant affect, meaning is important, whether as a critical component (Ryff & Singer, 1998) or as a result of maximizing one’s potentials (e.g., Deci & Ryan, 2000; Maslow, 1971)....
[...]
...…American Psychological Association 2006, Vol. 53, No. 1, 80–93 0022-0167/06/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0022-0167.53.1.80 80 pleasant affect, meaning is important, whether as a critical component (Ryff & Singer, 1998) or as a result of maximizing one’s potentials (e.g., Deci & Ryan, 2000; Maslow, 1971)....
[...]
3,014 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)....
[...]
References
93 citations
"The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..." refers background or methods in this paper
...Consider, for example, the now classic research by Olds (1958) who showed that rats, when their behavior had been entrained by the exogenous application of rewards based in electrical brain stimulation, worked themselves to exhaustion and starvation, thus neglecting important organismic needs and…...
[...]
...Most of these studies assessed self-regulation using an approach developed by Ryan and Connell (1989) in which people are asked why they engage in various behaviors (e....
[...]
89 citations
"The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..." refers background in this paper
...The achievement motive is to a substantial degree based in what we consider the innate need for competence (Koestner & McClelland, 1990), yet if one were to define the need for achievement restrictively to represent only what we call the need for competence it is likely that the need would…...
[...]
87 citations
"The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..." refers methods in this paper
...These individual differences are the foci of thematic (or implicit) and questionnaire (or explicit) methods of assessment (Ryan & Manly, in press) and are used as the basis for predicting affective and behavioral outcomes (e.g., McAdams, 1989; McClelland, 1985)....
[...]
85 citations
"The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursui..." refers background in this paper
...For example, Chandler and Connell (1987) showed that, increasingly with age, children displayed internalized regulation of behaviors that were originally externally compelled. Yet internalization, like other natural processes such as intrinsic motivation, requires nutriments to function effectively; in other words, internalization does not happen automatically. The degree to which people are able to actively synthesize cultural demands, values, and regulations and to incorporate them into the self is in large part a function of the degree to which fulfillment of the basic psychological needs is supported as they engage in the relevant behaviors. SDT proposes that people will tend naturally to internalize the values and regulations of their social groups. This tendency is facilitated by feelings of relatedness to socializing others, as well as feelings of competence with respect to the regulation being internalized. The latter includes the ability to understand or grasp the meaning or rationale behind the regulation and an ability to enact it. Supports for relatedness and competence thus facilitate internalization and can be sufficient to produce introjected values or compartmentalized (poorly integrated) identifications. However, for a regulation to become more integral to one’s self, supports for autonomy are also required. That is, although support for relatedness and competence needs may promote the internalization of a regulation or value, those supports alone will not be sufficient to foster integration. For integration to occur there must be an opportunity for the individual to freely process and endorse transmitted values and regulations (and to modify or transform them when necessary). Excessive external pressures, controls, and evaluations appear to forestall rather than facilitate this active, constructive process of giving personal meaning and valence to acquired regulations. Field research and laboratory experiments provided support for our general hypothesis. For example, Grolnick and Ryan (1989) interviewed parents of late-elementary students in their homes and then assessed the children’s motivation and internalization in their classrooms. This study revealed that the degree to which parents provided autonomy support, optimal structure, and interpersonal involvement concerning their children’s school work directly affected the extent to which the children valued and internalized the regulation of school-related activities. Parents who were rated by the interviewers as more involved and autonomy supportive had children who displayed not only more intrinsic motivation but also more internalized self-regulation for academic endeavors. In turn this was associated with enhanced performance and well-being. Subsequently, Grolnick, Ryan, and Deci (1991) showed that children’s perceptions of parental involvement and autonomy support also predicted more autonomous self-regulation....
[...]
...For example, Chandler and Connell (1987) showed that, increasingly with age, children displayed internalized regulation of behaviors that were originally externally compelled. Yet internalization, like other natural processes such as intrinsic motivation, requires nutriments to function effectively; in other words, internalization does not happen automatically. The degree to which people are able to actively synthesize cultural demands, values, and regulations and to incorporate them into the self is in large part a function of the degree to which fulfillment of the basic psychological needs is supported as they engage in the relevant behaviors. SDT proposes that people will tend naturally to internalize the values and regulations of their social groups. This tendency is facilitated by feelings of relatedness to socializing others, as well as feelings of competence with respect to the regulation being internalized. The latter includes the ability to understand or grasp the meaning or rationale behind the regulation and an ability to enact it. Supports for relatedness and competence thus facilitate internalization and can be sufficient to produce introjected values or compartmentalized (poorly integrated) identifications. However, for a regulation to become more integral to one’s self, supports for autonomy are also required. That is, although support for relatedness and competence needs may promote the internalization of a regulation or value, those supports alone will not be sufficient to foster integration. For integration to occur there must be an opportunity for the individual to freely process and endorse transmitted values and regulations (and to modify or transform them when necessary). Excessive external pressures, controls, and evaluations appear to forestall rather than facilitate this active, constructive process of giving personal meaning and valence to acquired regulations. Field research and laboratory experiments provided support for our general hypothesis. For example, Grolnick and Ryan (1989) interviewed parents of late-elementary students in their homes and then assessed the children’s motivation and internalization in their classrooms. This study revealed that the degree to which parents provided autonomy support, optimal structure, and interpersonal involvement concerning their children’s school work directly affected the extent to which the children valued and internalized the regulation of school-related activities. Parents who were rated by the interviewers as more involved and autonomy supportive had children who displayed not only more intrinsic motivation but also more internalized self-regulation for academic endeavors. In turn this was associated with enhanced performance and well-being. Subsequently, Grolnick, Ryan, and Deci (1991) showed that children’s perceptions of parental involvement and autonomy support also predicted more autonomous self-regulation. Williams and Deci (1996) provided data showing the generalizability of this model of internalization to medical school settings....
[...]
...It remains extrinsic motivation because, even though fully volitional, it is instrumental rather than being what Csikszentmihalyi (1975) referred to as autotelic....
[...]
...For example, Chandler and Connell (1987) showed that, increasingly with age, children displayed internalized regulation of behaviors that were originally externally compelled. Yet internalization, like other natural processes such as intrinsic motivation, requires nutriments to function effectively; in other words, internalization does not happen automatically. The degree to which people are able to actively synthesize cultural demands, values, and regulations and to incorporate them into the self is in large part a function of the degree to which fulfillment of the basic psychological needs is supported as they engage in the relevant behaviors. SDT proposes that people will tend naturally to internalize the values and regulations of their social groups. This tendency is facilitated by feelings of relatedness to socializing others, as well as feelings of competence with respect to the regulation being internalized. The latter includes the ability to understand or grasp the meaning or rationale behind the regulation and an ability to enact it. Supports for relatedness and competence thus facilitate internalization and can be sufficient to produce introjected values or compartmentalized (poorly integrated) identifications. However, for a regulation to become more integral to one’s self, supports for autonomy are also required. That is, although support for relatedness and competence needs may promote the internalization of a regulation or value, those supports alone will not be sufficient to foster integration. For integration to occur there must be an opportunity for the individual to freely process and endorse transmitted values and regulations (and to modify or transform them when necessary). Excessive external pressures, controls, and evaluations appear to forestall rather than facilitate this active, constructive process of giving personal meaning and valence to acquired regulations. Field research and laboratory experiments provided support for our general hypothesis. For example, Grolnick and Ryan (1989) interviewed parents of late-elementary students in their homes and then assessed the children’s motivation and internalization in their classrooms....
[...]
...For example, Chandler and Connell (1987) showed that, increasingly with age, children displayed internalized regulation of behaviors that were originally externally compelled....
[...]
80 citations