short essay on self determination

Self-Determination Theory: How It Explains Motivation

Gabriel Lopez-Garrido

Undergraduate at Harvard University

Political Science and Psychology

Gabriel Lopez-Garrido is currently in his final year at Harvard University. He is pursuing a Bachelor's degree with a primary focus on Political Science (Government) and a minor in Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

On This Page:

Key Takeaways

• Self-determination refers to the ability of individuals to make choices and determine their own actions.
• Self-determination is a theory of human motivation and personality that suggests that people can become self-determined when their needs for competence, relatedness, and autonomy are fulfilled.
• The presence versus absence of environmental conditions that allow satisfaction of these basic needs (in people’s immediate situations and in their developmental histories) is a key predictor of whether or not people will display vitality and mental health.
• People tend to become happier when pursuing things that are intrinsically motivated and aligned with their own goals – it not only makes them feel more responsible about the outcomes, it also helps them to really focus their time on what they want to be doing.
• Self-determination theory itself can be helpful in understanding the things that might motivate a given individual’s behavior. Feeling like one has both the autonomy and the capabilities required to make choices on their own is something that most, if not every, individual would want to have.

What is Self-Determination?

The term self-determination was first introduced by Deci and Ryan in their 1985 book Self-Determination and Intrinsic Motivation in Human Behavior .

The term self-determination refers to a person’s own ability to manage themselves, to make confident choices, and to think on their own (Deci, 1971).

Self-determination is a macro theory of human motivation and personality. It is a theory that deals with two huge factors: people’s inherent growth tendencies and the innate psychological needs of these same individuals.

Given how self-determination can help with achieving independence, this concept plays an essential role not only in the overall well-being of the individual, but also their overall psychological health.

Because self-determination puts the individual in the driving seat, it makes the person both responsible and potentially culpable for whatever happens.

Given this, self-determination also has a large impact on motivation. If the individual themselves believe they can manage themselves properly, they would more than likely find more motivation in whatever task they wish to carry out.

Theoretical Assumptions

The need for growth drives behavior.

The first assumption of self-determination theory is that a need for growth as a human being drives behavior. People are always actively seeking to grow and improve (Deci & Ryan, 1985).

Gaining mastery over challenges (both new and old) is essential for developing a sense of self or, at the very least, a cohesive one.

Autonomous motivation is important.

Self-determination theory focuses on the interplay between the extrinsic forces acting on persons and the intrinsic motive and needs of human beings. People can generally be motivated by outside factors such as money, acclaim, and fame, and this type of motivation is known as extrinsic . 

Self-determination theory focuses primarily on internal sources of motivation (known as intrinsic motivation), such as learning to gain independence and wanting to prove yourself.

According to Lepper et al. (1973), if the behavior is purely self-determined, there is a very high chance that it will be both intrinsically driven and that the behavior is done not for the reward or the prize, but rather for self-satisfaction, interest, and enjoyment for the behavior itself.

Non-self-determined behaviors are only performed only because they have to get done – not out of enjoyment or because it fulfills the individual, rather because the individual has little to no choice on whether they want to partake in said behavior. This leads to a lack of control given that this behavior is not done willingly.

Basic Needs

Self-determination theory posits that people are driven by three innate and universal psychological needs, and that personal well-being is a direct function of the satisfaction of these basic psychological needs (Deci & Ryan, 1991;Ryan, 1995),

Competence (need to be effective in dealing with the environment)

Competence is a term utilized to describe someone who has sufficient qualities to perform a given task or to describe the state of having sufficient intellect, judgment, skill, and/or strength.

When an individual feels competent, they feel able to interact effectively within their environment, and they have the skills needed for success to ensure that their goals are achieved. A competent person feels a sense of mastery over their environment.

If tasks are too challenging or a person receives negative feedback, feelings of competence can decrease. Alternatively, feelings of competence are enhanced when the demands of a task are optimally matched to a person’s skills, or positive feedback is received.

Relatedness (need to have close, affectionate relationships)

Relatedness is the ability to feel a sense of both attachment to other people and a sense of belonging amongst other people.

Relatedness involves feelings of closeness and belonging to a social group.

Without connections, self-determination is harder to achieve because the individual would lack access to both help and support.

Feelings of relatedness are enhanced when individuals are respected and cared for by others, and are part of an inclusive environment. Alternatively, feelings of relatedness are undermined by competition with others, cliques, and criticism from others.

Autonomy (need to feel self-governing and independent)

Autonomy is the ability to feel in control of one’s behavior and destiny, and involves self-initiation and self-regulation of one’s own behavior.

Autonomy involves being able to make your own decisions and is associated with feelings of independence.

Feelings of autonomy are enhanced when individuals are given choice and are able to govern their own behavior, and when other people acknowledge their feelings.

Alternatively, the individual lacks autonomy if they feel controlled or threatened by others, or have to operate according to deadlines.

Tangible rewards can also reduce feelings of autonomy. If one were to give someone an extrinsic reward for already intrinsically motivated behavior, then the likelihood that autonomy is undermined (given that the extrinsic reward is likely to draw attention away from autonomy) is fairly large.

It gets even worse if the behavior is repeated: as the behavior becomes increasingly controlled by external rewards rather than by autonomy. Thus, intrinsic motivation is diminished, and people start to feel both a different source for their motivation and less belief in their own personal qualities.

Research on self-determination theory has shown the importance of the three basic needs in real-world settings, such as the workplace, education, and sports.

In the Classroom

• Researchers have found that students show a greater intrinsic motivation towards learning when teachers encourage a culture of autonomy in the classroom (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). Students experience autonomy when they feel supported to explore, take initiative and develop and implement solutions for their problems.
• Teachers should provide prompt feedback and stretch and challenge students to promote a sense of competence. If done correctly, feedback not only works because it provides an insight into how that student is doing, but because when students perform well and they are given positive feedback, it makes them feel good about the work they have achieved.
• Students experience relatedness when they perceive others listening and responding to them. When these three needs are met,
• It is fine to reward a student for their success, but avoiding excessive external rewards for actions students already enjoy is essential if one wants to improve their internal desire for motivation (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999) Students who are more involved in setting educational goals are more likely to experience intrinsic motivation, and are more likely to reach their goals.

In the Workplace

People who feel that they can have a positive effect at work tend to feel more engaged and motivated. How else can employers build self-determination in their workers?

• Organizations should encourage autonomy in the workplace as this can enhances employees’ well-being, productivity, and personal growth, and contributes to organizational effectiveness (Strauss & Parker, 2014).
• One way that managers and leaders can help their employees with developing self-determination is by putting them in leadership roles. For example, let’s say that the company needs to prepare a presentation for a huge client.
• A manager who wants to build his employer’s sense of self-determination will take steps to ensure that the each of the team members working on the presentation take an active role. One could be in charge of designing the graphs, while the other is in charge of the marketing strategy.
• Constructive feedback works wonders for building self-determined behaviors like competence.Feedback helps individuals understand what they are doing wrong and how they can improve doing said task. It helps people feel as if their work has actual value, which is key in trying to build motivation.
• Employers should be careful not to offer one too many extrinsic rewards as this can diminish a sense of autonomy. If extrinsic rewards are in the picture, it is likely to become the case that – at some point – the work will stop being about loving what one does and become about simply obtaining the reward.

In Competition

Fostering a sense of self-determination is one of the many things that can inspire certain individuals to excel – this is especially true in competitive settings -such as sports and athletics – where the stakes are sometimes so high.

• It surely is a given that athletes are driven to perform better in their designated sport if they themselves believe that they are capable of overcoming the hurdles that may arise along the way (Hagger & Chatzisarantis, 2008).

In a Social Setting

If an individual attempts to forge close, and affectionate relationships with other people – the likelihood that self-determination behaviors improve (or are seen more often) is high. What are some specific ways that people can build self-determination in social settings?

• One specific way to build self-determination in these types of settings is by actively seeking positive relationships with people that promote a positive environment.
• When seeking social relationships, an individual who wants to work on their self-determination should look for individuals who will support them in the pursuit of their goals.

How to Improve Self-Determination

People who are high in self-determination tend to believe in their own innate ability and that they have control over their own lives.

People who practice self-determined behaviors have an internal locus of control , and this makes them feel that their behaviors will have an influence on outcomes.

More importantly, it makes them understand that in order for other people to start believing in this individual’s abilities, the same individual must first believe in themselves.

People who believe in themselves- when faced with a difficult scenario feel that they can overcome anything they set their minds on through the use of diligence, good choices, and hard work.

Without an individual believing in themselves, chances are that individual is likely less to give 100% of his effort when trying to achieve any task (after all, why would said individual give so much time and effort to a cause they think they are bound to already fail)?

People who are high in self-determination tend to have high self-motivation.

People who demonstrate self-determined behaviors tend not to rely on external rewards as a means for them to do a task. Often, times completing the task properly is its own reward.

To improve motivation, it is essential to remove external rewards and punishments as a reason for completing a task. Self-determined individuals set goals and work to reach them because they feel enough motivation to know that their effort will produce a finished product.

People who are high in self-determination tend to take responsibility for their behaviors.

The biggest difference between someone who is self-determined and someone who isn’t is that highly self-determined people take credit for their success but also hold their heads high up in the face of failure. They have no problem with taking responsibility, because they know they can do better.

Conversely, individuals who lack self-determination will attempt to put the blame on someone or something else in an attempt to take of the pressure from themselves.

Taking responsibility is important for learning how to become self-determined as it helps the individual accept that they are human (meaning, that they are capable of failure) and also that they are capable of owning up to their mistakes (which is a sign of confidence).

It puts the individual in a situation where they appreciate that things happen to them even more because – at the end of the day – the person who is responsible for putting the individual in that situation is the individual themselves.

Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 105–115.

Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation . Psychological Bulletin, 125 (6), 627.

Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality”. In R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation: Vol. 38. Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237–288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Motivation, personality, and development within embedded social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 85-107). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Hagger, M., & Chatzisarantis, N. (2008). Self-determination theory and the psychology of exercise . International review of sport and exercise psychology, 1 (1), 79-103.

Lepper, M. K., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R. (1973). Undermining children’s intrinsic interest with extrinsic reward: A test of the “over justification” hypothesis . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28 (1), 129–137.

Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice . Theory and research in Education, 7 (2), 133-144.

Pritchard, R.; Campbell, K.; Campbell, D. (1977). Effects of extrinsic financial rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62 (1), 9.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being . American Psychologist, 55 (1), 68–78.

Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness . New York: Guilford Publishing.

Strauss, K., & Parker, S. K. (2014). Effective and sustained proactivity in the workplace: A self‐determination theory perspective . In M. Gagné (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of work engagement, motivation, and self‐determination theory (pp. 50–72). Oxford: Oxford University Press .

Further Reading

• Deci, E. L., La Guardia, J. G., Moller, A. C., Scheiner, M. J., & Ryan, R. M. (2006). On the benefits of giving as well as receiving autonomy support: Mutuality in close friendships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32 (3), 313–327.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The” what” and” why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11 (4), 227-268.
• Reis, H. T., Sheldon, K. M., Gable, S. L., Roscoe, J., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Daily well-being: The role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26 (4), 419–435.
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55 , 68-78.

Which psychological need in the self-determination theory (sdt) is described as the basic need to feel effective and capable in one’s actions?

In Self-Determination Theory (SDT), the psychological need described as the basic desire to feel effective and capable in one’s actions is referred to as ‘Competence.’ This need represents an individual’s inherent desire to engage in challenges and to experience mastery or proficiency in their endeavors.

According to self-determination theory, people’s behavior and well-being are influenced by what three innate needs?

According to Self-Determination Theory, people’s behavior and well-being are influenced by three innate needs: Autonomy, the need to be in control of one’s actions and choices; Competence, the need to be effective and master tasks; and Relatedness, the need to have meaningful relationships and feel connected with others.

These needs are universal, innate, and psychological, and are essential for an individual’s optimal function and growth.

What is self-determination?

Self-determination refers to the process by which a person controls their own life. It involves making choices and decisions based on personal preferences and interests, the freedom to pursue goals, and the ability to be independent and autonomous.

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is Self-Determination Theory?

How Self-Determination Influences Motivation

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

• How It Works
• Self-Determined vs. Non-Self-Determined
• How to Improve

Self-determination refers to a person's ability to make choices and manage their own life . Being self-determined means that you feel in greater control, as opposed to being non-self-determined, which can leave you feeling that your life is controlled by others.

It states that people are motivated to grow and change by three innate (and universal) psychological needs. The concept of intrinsic motivation , or engaging in activities for the inherent reward of the behavior itself, plays an important role in this theory.

Self-determination is an important concept in psychology since it plays a role in psychological health and well-being . Promoting self-determination is also an emerging best practice when working with certain populations, such as individuals with intellectual disabilities .

Self-determination theory seeks to explain how being self-determined impacts motivation—that people feel more motivated to take action when they think that what they do will have an effect on the outcome. Learn more about how this theory works, as well as what you can do to improve your self-determination skills.

Self-determination theory suggests that people can become self-determined when their needs for competence, connection, and autonomy are fulfilled.

Self-determination theory grew out of the work of psychologists Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, who first introduced their ideas in their 1985 book Self-Determination and Intrinsic Motivation in Human Behavior . They developed a theory of motivation that suggests people tend to be driven by a need to grow and gain fulfillment.

Assumptions of Self-Determination

Self-determination theory makes two key assumptions:

The need for growth drives behavior. The first assumption of self-determination theory is that people are actively directed toward growth. Gaining mastery over challenges and taking in new experiences are essential for developing a cohesive sense of self .

Autonomous motivation is important. While people are often motivated to act by external rewards such as money, prizes, and acclaim (known as  extrinsic motivation ), self-determination theory focuses primarily on internal sources of motivation such as a need to gain knowledge or independence (intrinsic motivation).

Components of Self-Determination

According to self-determination theory, people need to feel the following to achieve psychological growth:

• Autonomy : People need to feel in control of their own behaviors and goals. This sense of being able to take direct action that will result in real change plays a major part in helping people feel self-determined.
• Competence : People need to gain mastery of tasks and learn different skills . When people feel that they have the skills needed for success, they are more likely to take actions that will help them achieve their goals.
• Connection or relatedness : People need to experience a sense of belonging and attachment to other people.

Press Play for Advice On Setting Goals

Hosted by therapist Amy Morin, LCSW, this episode of The Verywell Mind Podcast shares how to set goals that you can realistically meet. Click below to listen now.

Subscribe Now : Apple Podcasts / Spotify / Google Podcasts

How Self-Determination Theory Works

It's important to realize that the psychological growth described by self-determination theory does not happen automatically. While people might be oriented toward such growth, it requires continual sustenance.

Ryan and Deci have suggested that the tendency to be either proactive or passive is largely influenced by the social conditions in which we are raised.  Social support is key. Through our relationships and interactions with others, we can foster or thwart well-being and personal growth.

Other factors that also help or hinder the three elements needed for growth include:

• Extrinsic motivators can sometimes lower self-determination. According to Deci, giving people extrinsic rewards for intrinsically motivated behavior can undermine autonomy. As the behavior becomes increasingly controlled by external rewards, people begin to feel less in control of their behavior and intrinsic motivation is diminished.
• Positive feedback can boost self-determination. Deci also suggests that offering unexpected positive encouragement and feedback on a person's task performance can increase intrinsic motivation. This type of feedback helps people feel more competent, which is a key need for personal growth.

Example of Self-Determination

Imagine a person who fails to complete an important project at work. If this person is high in self-determination, they will admit their fault, believe that they can do something to fix the problem, and take action to correct the mistake .

If that same person was low in self-determination, they might instead look for other things that they can blame. They might make excuses, assign blame elsewhere, or refuse to admit their own role in not completing the project on time.

Most importantly, perhaps, is that the person low in self-determination won't feel motivated to fix the mistake. Instead, they might feel helpless to control the situation and believe that nothing that they do will have any real effect.

Self-Determined vs. Non-Self-Determined Behaviors

Motivated by intrinsic rewards

Driven by enjoyment, interest, or satisfaction

Feel in control

Motivated by extrinsic rewards

Driven by obligation or responsibility

Feel a lack of control

Rather than thinking of motivation as being driven by either extrinsic or intrinsic rewards, it is often helpful to view it as a continuum between self-determined and non-self-determined behaviors.

• On one end of the continuum are purely self-determined behaviors that tend to be intrinsically driven and done for the enjoyment of, interest in, and inherent satisfaction for the action itself.
• On the other end are non-self-determined behaviors, which are performed only because they must be done. There is a complete lack of control on this extreme end of the scale.

If you are training to compete in a marathon, for example, you might be extrinsically motivated by a desire to gain approval from others. At the same time, you may also be intrinsically motivated by the satisfaction you gain from the activity itself. In most cases, behaviors tend to lie in the middle of the continuum.

There is also often a varying amount of external motivation, which can fuel the degree of internal motivation. People may engage in actions because they feel they have some level of personal control and the behaviors ultimately align with something that is important for their self-concept.

Most actions are not purely self-determined or non-self-determined. Instead, actions often rely on a certain degree of self-determination that may also be influenced by extrinsic motivations.

Impact of Self-Determination

The concept of self-determination has been applied to a wide variety of areas including education, work, parenting, exercise, and health. Research suggests that having high self-determination can foster success in many different domains of life.

In the Workplace

People with self-determination feel more satisfied at work while also playing a key role in that organization's success. How can employers build self-determination in their workers?

• By allowing team members to take an active role
• Not overusing extrinsic rewards since this can undercut intrinsic motivation, a phenomenon known as the overjustification effect
• Offering employees greater responsibilities
• Offering support and encouragement
• Providing employees with meaningful feedback

In Competition

In competitive settings, such as sports and athletics, fostering a sense of self-determination can motivate people to excel. Some suggest that it works, at least in part, by increasing a person's level of mental toughness .

Athletes who feel that they are capable of achieving their goals and overcoming challenges are often driven to perform better. Excelling allows them to gain a sense of competence and build mastery in skills that are enjoyable and important to them.

Researchers have also found that people with an internal sense of control are more likely to stick to a healthy diet and regular exercise regimen .  

In Social Settings

Self-determination can also play an important role in social relationships. For instance, when people are new to an online group , if their needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence (the three components of self-determination) are fulfilled, it impacts their social identity which, in turn, affects their participation behaviors.

To forge close, affectionate relationships with others, thus potentially improving self-determination:

• Seek positive relationships with people who will support you in the pursuit of your goals.
• Offer support and feedback to people who are part of your social circle.

In School Settings

Self-determined students are more likely to feel motivated to achieve. They also tend to feel greater levels of competence and satisfaction. Educators can help students foster a sense of self-determination and intrinsic motivation by:

• Providing unexpected positive feedback when students perform well to help improve their feelings of competence
• Avoiding excessive external rewards for actions students already enjoy, which helps improve their internal motivation

Self-determination can play an important role in how people function in many different areas of their lives. Feeling in control and intrinsically motivated can help people feel more committed, passionate, interested, and satisfied with the things that they do.

Traits of Self-Determined People

If you are interested in strengthening your self-determination, it is helpful to think about what a highly self-determined individual might look like. People high in self-determination tend to:

• Believe that they have control over their own lives . Self-determined people have an internal locus of control and feel that their behaviors will have an influence on outcomes. When confronted with challenges, they feel that they can overcome them through diligence, good choices, and hard work.
• Have high self-motivation . Someone with high self-determination doesn't rely on external rewards or punishments to motivate them to take action. Instead, they engage in behaviors because they are motivated intrinsically. They have an internal desire to set goals and work toward them.
• Base their actions on their own goals and behaviors . In other words, people with self-motivation intentionally engage in actions that they know will bring them closer to their goals.
• Take responsibility for their behaviors . Highly self-determined people take credit for their success but they also accept the blame for their failures. They know that they are responsible for their actions and don't shift blame elsewhere.

How to Improve Your Self-Determination

Do you want to be more self-determined? There are a few steps you can take to improve your own self-determination skills.

Improve Your Self-Awareness

Self-awareness is associated with self-determination and can even help prepare you to make more purposeful decisions. Meditation, seeking regular feedback, and writing down your thoughts and feelings are all ways to improve self-awareness.

Engage in Self-Regulation

Developing a higher level of self-determination involves also working on your self-regulation skills. Strategies that can help you better regulate yourself include being more mindful of how you feel mentally and physically, along with practicing cognitive reframing to better regulate your emotional responses.

Find Social Support

Strong social relationships can foster motivation and well-being. Seek people who make you feel welcome and cared for. This may be a family member or friend, or it could be a member of your church, a counselor, or anyone else who provides a sense of support and belonging.

Gain Mastery

Becoming skilled in areas that are important to you can help build your sense of self-determination. Whether you have a strong interest in a hobby , sport, academic subject, or another area, learning as much as you can about it and improving your skills can help you feel more competent.

The more you learn and practice, the more skilled and self-determined you will likely feel.

A Word From Verywell

Self-determination theory can be helpful in understanding what might motivate your behaviors. Being self-determined, feeling like you have the autonomy and freedom to make choices that shape your destiny, is important for each person's well-being.

When you pursue things that are intrinsically motivated and aligned with your goals, you will feel happier and more capable of making good choices.

Wehmeyer ML, Shogren KA. Self-determination and choice . In Singh, N. (eds) Handbook of Evidence-Based Practices in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities . 2016. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-26583-4_21

Ryan RM, Deci EL. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions . Contemp Educ Psychol . 2020;61:101860. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860

Rigby CS, Ryan, RM. Self-determination theory in human resource development: New directions and practical considerations . Adv Develop Human Resourc . 2018;20(2):133-147. doi:10.1177/1523422318756954

Mahoney J, Ntoumanis N, Mallett C, Gucciardi D. The motivational antecedents of the development of mental toughness: a self-determination theory perspective . Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol . 2014;7(1):184-197. doi:10.1080/1750984X.2014.925951

Cobb-Clark DA, Kassenboehmer SC, Schurer S. Healthy habits: The connection between diet, exercise, and locus of control . J Econ Behav Organiz . 2014;98:1-28. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2013.10.011

Tsai HT, Pai P. Why do newcomers participate in virtual communities? An integration of self-determination and relationship management theories . Decision Supp Systems . 2014;57:178-187. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2013.09.001

Vasconcellos D, Parker PD, Hilland T, at al. Self-determination theory applied to physical education: A systematic review and meta-analysis . J Educ Psychol . 2020;112(7):1444-1469. doi:10.1037/edu0000420

Burke KM, Raley SK, Shogren KA, et al. A meta-analysis of interventions to promote self-determination for students with disabilities . Remedial Spec Educ . 2020;41(3):176-188. doi:10.1177/0741932518802274

Schultz PP, Ryan RM. The 'why,' 'what,' and 'how' of healthy self-regulation: Mindfulness and well-being from a self-determination theory perspective . In: Ostafin B, Robinson M, Meier B (eds) Handbook of Mindfulness and Self-Regulation . doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-2263-5_7

Hagger M, Chatzisarantis N. Self-determination Theory and the psychology of exercise .  Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol . 2008;1(1):79-103. doi:10.1080/17509840701827437

Niemiec CP, Ryan RM. Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice .  Theory Res Educ . 2009;7(2):133-144. doi:10.1177/1477878509104318

Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness . Guilford Press. 2017. doi:10.1521/978.14625/28806

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

The Role of Self-Determination in Well-Being

Learn about what self-determination is and how it can affect your well-being..

Updated December 3, 2023 | Reviewed by Devon Frye

• What Is Motivation?
• Find a therapist near me
• Self-determination theory says that we have three psychological needs for optimal well-being.
• Autonomous regulation is linked with greater overall well-being,
• Autonomous motivation is associated with greater creativity and improved problem-solving.

Cowritten by Tchiki Davis and Sarah Sperber

Why do you do the things you do? Why did you brush your teeth this morning, go to work, or click on this post? And is it possible to change the way you behave?

Motivation underlies all of our behavior. Self-determination theory is a widely recognized framework for understanding motivation and the impact that different types of motivation can have on different aspects of well-being . Read on to learn the fundamental principles of self-determination theory and how to live a more self-determined life.

What Self-Determination Is

The psychologists who developed self-determination theory defined self-determination as follows: “Self‐determination means acting with a sense of choice, volition, and commitment, and it is based on intrinsic motivation and integrated extrinsic motivation ” (Deci & Ryan, 2010).

Psychologists Edward Deci and Richard Ryan first presented self-determination theory (referred to as SDT for short) in their 1985 book, Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior . They suggest that there are four different types of behavior regulation or motivation, two of which are autonomous and two of which are controlled. In this theory, autonomous regulation is the basis for self-determination (Deci & Ryan, 2010).

• Autonomous motivation or regulation refers to acting out of a sense of willingness, volition, and choice (Deci, 2017).
• Controlled motivation or regulation refers to acting out of a sense of pressure, demand, or obligation (Deci, 2017).

Self-Determination Examples

Here are some examples of self-determined behaviors:

• A child playing with toys for enjoyment
• Exercising because you value the health benefits
• Quitting smoking because you value living a longer life with your children
• A child completing their chores because they understand the value of responsibility
• Creating art for the inherent joy of it
• Choosing a career path with a complete sense of willingness

Principles of Self-Determination

Self-determination theory states that humans have three psychological needs for optimal well-being and performance: relatedness, competence, and autonomy. When someone feels related to others, competent, and like they are acting with a sense of volition, they will be autonomously motivated or self-determined (Deci, 2017; Deci & Ryan, 2012).

• Relatedness refers to the need to be cared for and caring for others.
• Competence refers to the need to feel effective in one’s behavior.
• Autonomy refers to the need to feel that one is acting out of a sense of volition and self-endorsement (Vansteenkiste & Ryan, 2013).

The research suggests that to foster self-determination in oneself or others, it is important to create a supportive environment that satisfies all three of the above needs (Deci & Ryan, 2012).

How Self-Determination May Affect Well-Being

So why do these different types of motivation or regulation matter? If you end up with the same behaviors, then does it make a difference what is motivating them? Well, your own experience might tell you that the type of motivation you have can influence how you feel while you engage in a behavior.

Research surrounding self-determination theory​ has found that autonomous regulation is linked with greater overall well-being. “Those behaviors that are more self‐determined and less controlled are associated with a stronger sense of personal commitment, greater persistence, more positive feelings, higher quality performance, and better mental health ” (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Studies have found that autonomous motivation is also associated with greater creativity and improved problem-solving (Deci, 2012).

With this in mind, it is likely helpful to learn how to increase the amount of autonomous regulation in your life. To do this, you can work on creating a supportive environment for yourself based on the above principles of relatedness, competence, and autonomy.

A version of this post also appears as an article on The Berkeley Well-Being Institute Web site.

​Deci, E. L. (2012, August). Promoting Motivation, Health, and Excellence: Ed Deci at TEDxFlourCity. TED Conferences.

Deci, E. L. (2017, October). Edward Deci - Self-Determination Theory. The Brainwaves Video Anthology

Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. United States: Springer US.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry , 11(4), 227-268.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). Self‐determination. The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology, 1-2.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Self-determination theory. In P. A. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology: Volume 1 (Vol. 1, pp. 416-437). SAGE Publications Ltd, https://www.doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n21

Vansteenkiste, M., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). On psychological growth and vulnerability: Basic psychological need satisfaction and need frustration as a unifying principle. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration , 23(3), 263.

Tchiki Davis, Ph.D. , is a consultant, writer, and expert on well-being technology.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Teletherapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Is self-determination good for your effectiveness? A study of factors which influence performance within self-determination theory

Michał szulawski.

1 Institute of Psychology, The Maria Grzegorzewska University, Warsaw, Poland

Izabela Kaźmierczak

Monika prusik.

2 Department of Psychology, The University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

Associated Data

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files.

Despite the vast body of studies within self-determination theory, the impact of factors which influence performance in experimental paradigm is still underresearched. The aim of the two studies presented in this paper was to investigate the impact of basic psychological needs on performance with the simultaneous presence of external incentives. Study 1 tested whether the satisfaction of competence and relatedness during task performance (while external incentives were present) can impact individual’s performance. Study 2, on the other hand, investigated whether the basic psychological needs and provision of external incentives can impact an individual’s performance. Moreover, in both studies the mechanisms behind the need–performance relationship was checked. Our results showed that out of the three basic needs, competence had the strongest positive impact on performance, which was partially mediated by the subjective evaluation of the levels of difficulty and intrinsic motivation. The weak relationship between relatedness and task performance was fully mediated by the level of intrinsic motivation.

Introduction

When we asked people a question concerning the reasons why they work, learn, or exercise efficiently, with a high degree of probability they would enumerate some kind of incentives or rewards (remuneration, grades, or bonuses) at the top of their lists. This common belief has almost become an axiom, which can make people reject—or at least undermine—other possible explanations of what could increase the performance of their actions or undertakings. This explanation, often viewed with scepticism, of what (except incentives) can predict or enhance performance, is offered by self-determination theory (SDT); [ 1 – 3 ], which is one of the most often cited theories of human motivation. SDT depicts human beings as having three basic psychological needs which contribute to the development of their intrinsic motivation towards striving, well-being, and performance [ 4 ]. However, understanding of the influence of motivational factors within the theory, such as the three needs and incentives on performance has been mostly studied outside the laboratory contexts [ 5 – 8 ]. The three basic psychological needs of SDT, namely autonomy, competence, and relatedness, are defined as universal and relevant within all people and cultures [ 9 ]. Autonomy involves feeling internal approval of one’s behaviour, thoughts, and emotions rather than feeling controlled or pressured; competence involves feeling efficient and qualified in one’s behaviour, rather than incompetent and ineffective; and relatedness involves feeling meaningfully connected to others, rather than feeling alienated or ostracized. Over the past decades, researchers have established that satisfaction of autonomy, competence, and relatedness is critical to most domains of human functioning such as health care [ 10 , 11 ], mental health [ 12 , 13 ], the development of well-being [ 14 , 15 ], the development of intrinsic motivation [ 16 ], engagement at work [ 17 , 18 ], and in sports [ 19 , 20 ] to name a few. However, the links between needs satisfaction and performance has not attracted much attention from researchers [ 6 ].

Basic psychological needs and performance

The way in which autonomy, competence, and relatedness are understood in self-determination theory is quite unique in the performance context [ 6 ]. According to SDT, and in opposition to other needs theories, the three needs do not vary by the extent to which people possess them, but by the extent to which the environment facilitates their satisfaction or frustration [ 9 ]. The main reason for why the three needs could influence performance is that the environments which facilitate the needs build autonomous and intrinsic types of motivation, which consequently improves performance. Extensive research confirms the link between the needs satisfaction and autonomous motivation [ 2 , 21 – 24 ] and between autonomous or intrinsic motivation and performance [ 25 ]. Moreover, recent meta-analysis confirms the relationship between basic needs and performance [ 6 ]. Authors also emphasise that there are other different reasons why they can predict performance, rather than an increase in internal motivation, which are exclusive for each of the needs. For the need for autonomy this is an internal locus of causality for the actions which lead to taking ownership of the action [ 6 , 26 ]; for the need for competence it is the mix of challenge and skill which enables an individual to experience an action which is not too easy and not too difficult, and at the same time to possess skills which are necessary to do or accomplish the activity [ 20 ], and for the need for relatedness it is the well-being of the person during the performance of the action [ 27 ]. However, there is still little research which shows the mechanism of the needs–performance relationship in an experimental context, especially combined with the presence of external incentives. In one research study where all three needs were manipulated experimentally, only competence had a positive impact on performance [ 13 ]. It is worth noting that in most, if not all, environments, such as school, work, or academia, the provision of external incentives (grades, remuneration, rewards) usually coexist with the possibility of supporting or frustrating the three needs (the organization of work, leadership style etc.). As a consequence, it is worth studying simultaneously the influence of both the three needs and incentives on performance.

Incentives and performance

In the context of self-determination theory, investigation of the relationship between incentives and performance has come to, what is called, an uncomfortable conclusion . In the body of research there is evidence for three seemingly true, but incompatible conclusions: (a) incentives boost performance, (b) intrinsic motivation boosts performance, and (c) incentives reduce intrinsic motivation (the undermining or crowding-out effect) [ 25 ]. Authors suggest that the uncomfortable conclusion is only seemingly true, as there was little research which took into consideration the situation where both incentives (extrinsic motivation) and basic psychological needs (intrinsic motivation) are present at the same time, and as there are possible different mechanisms (mediators) of the relationships.

When it comes to incentives and rewards, they are commonly regarded as an adequate means to improve performance [ 28 , 29 ]. Studies concerning incentives usually confirm the positive influence of incentives on individual performance [ 30 – 33 ], especially in short term [ 34 ]. According to meta-analysis the effect sizes of individual incentives on performance ranged from.19 to.39 (for different moderators) with a general effect size of.34 for the individual incentives from 116 studies [ 35 ].

The idea of the undermining effect (or crowding-out effect) also has a long tradition of research in the paradigm of Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET, a mini-theory of Self-Determination Theory) [ 24 ]. The studies have proven that rewards (alongside punishments and deadlines, for instance) may undermine intrinsic motivation towards a given activity by thwarting the need for autonomy (people perceive the reason as to why they do an activity as controlled and not chosen by them) and for competence (the focus is not on learning the activity but on the salient reason for doing it, e.g. a reward) [ 36 – 39 ]. Intrinsic motivation is understood as a ’spontaneous, evolved and inherent propensity (…) to develop through activity, to play, explore, and manipulate things, and by doing so develop competencies and capacities’ [ 24 , p.123].

In two studies we tried to investigate the simultaneous impact of incentives and basic psychological needs on performance.

Current study

The aim of the first study was to test whether the satisfaction of two out of three basic needs,–competence (competence supported or not) and relatedness (relatedness supported or not) during task performance and while external incentives were present can impact individual performance. The predictions of the possible outcomes were based mostly on the meta-analysis of the simultaneous impact of incentives and basic psychological needs on performance [ 6 ], experimental studies on influence of needs on performance [ 13 ] and the assumptions of self-determination theory [ 3 ]. It was suspected that, even though the external incentives were present and salient during the activity and might reduce intrinsic motivation [ 39 , 40 ], support for the need for competence and relatedness should positively influence performance. The meta-analysis showed a stronger relationship between competence and performance [ 6 ], and the experimental study conducted by Sheldon and Filak [ 13 ] showed that only competence (out of the three basic needs) had a positive impact on performance in the game-playing context. The groups with supported competence need should evaluate the task as less challenging, and the perception of a task which was not difficult should result in higher performance [ 41 ]. As a consequence, the relationship between support of the competence need and performance should be mediated by the level of intrinsic motivation and the level of subjective challenge of the task. Supporting the need for competence should result in a higher intrinsic motivation for doing the task, and as a consequence, higher motivation should result in higher performance. Supporting the need for relatedness, on the other hand, should also result in higher intrinsic motivation for doing the task, and higher motivation should result in higher performance [ 24 ]. The support of the need for relatedness should also increase affective well-being, which may have a positive impact on performance. Non-experimental studies suggest that well-being is related to performance [ 42 , 43 ].

Based on the aforementioned theoretical considerations and empirical research, the following three hypotheses were formulated:

• H1: Groups with supported basic psychological needs (competence, relatedness) will have a higher level of task performance.
• H2: The relationship between support of the need for competence and task performance level will be mediated by the level of intrinsic motivation and subjective challenge.
• H3: The relationship between the support of the need for relatedness and task performance level will be mediated by the level of intrinsic motivation and affective well-being.

In the first study participants received remuneration in all conditions for each of the origami figures folded, so the external incentives were present in all conditions. Even though, study 1 has no comparison group without incentives, the conditions in the study reflect the natural job conditions where people receive remuneration for their efforts, and still the environment may be more or less need-supportive.

Study 2 examined whether the basic psychological needs (the three needs: supported vs. frustrated) and provision of external incentives (whether rewards were present or not) can impact the individual’s performance. The predictions and hypotheses were again based on the meta-analysis conducted by Cerasoli [ 6 ] and the assumptions of self-determination theory [ 3 ]. It was assumed that provisions of incentives and support of basic psychological needs would positively impact performance. Out of four experimental groups, the group with both external incentives present and with their basic psychological needs supported would have the highest performance. We posited that even though the incentives in Study 2 are salient (so they can undermine intrinsic motivation) they would have a direct positive impact on performance. The needs–performance relationship would be mediated by intrinsic motivation and by the self-reported measure of the three basic psychological needs.

Three hypotheses were formulated:

• H4: Groups with supported basic psychological needs will have a higher task performance level than the groups without support.
• H5: Groups in which individuals are granted external incentives will have a higher task performance level than the groups without incentives.
• H6: The relationship between the needs support and task performance level will be mediated by the level of intrinsic motivation and level of basic psychological needs (self-report).

Participants

One hundred and eight university students ( N = 54 females) from different Varsavian Universities and different faculties (e.g. Educational Studies, Sociology, IT, German and English Philology) aged 19–33 years ( M = 23.03, SD = 2.96), participated in the study. The protocol of the study was approved by the University’s Ethical Committee. All participants gave written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki before participation.

Instruments

Task performance level was the number of origami figures folded by the participant which ranged from 0 to 10.

Subjective difficulty was measured by a 3-item declarative 10-point scale. The items were as follows:

• ’How difficult will the task of folding origami be for you ? ’ (1—very easy; 10—very difficult)
• ’What are your chances of folding the origami figures well ? ’ (1—a very small chance; 10—a very high probability, verging on certainty)
• ’How much mental effort will folding origami be for you ? ” (1—very little effort; 10—very high effort)

Intrinsic motivation related to laboratory activity was measured with the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI) [ 3 , 44 ]. The interest/enjoyment subscale is considered the self-report measure of intrinsic motivation; thus, although the overall questionnaire is called the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory, it is only the one subscale that assesses intrinsic motivation. The subscales have good psychometric properties, with the interest/enjoyment alpha α = .78.

Affective well-being was measured with Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS); [ 45 ]. The short, 20-item, state version of the scale was used. The scale has good psychometric properties, with an alpha α = .80 (positive emotion scale) and.91 (negative emotion scale). Such a measure of well-being was previously used in research on well-being [ 46 – 48 ].

In the study 1, the level of wellbeing was measured with the PWB questionnaire [ 49 ]. The index of wellbeing was not used in the study, it was measured for the purpose of future, follow-up study.

First, the participants were told that they would be taking part in a study about the use of origami in research on learning, which would involve folding simple origami puzzles. Participants who agreed to take part signed in through a computer platform to come for a meeting at a specific date and time. The experiment took place during one, individual meeting in a research room (this was the same for all participants) and lasted about 40 minutes for each participant. The experimenter explained that the participants would be folding origami puzzles and would receive 2 PLN (approx..50 EUR) for each origami figure folded. The participants were told that they could fold as many figures as they liked and after each figure had been folded the experimenter would ask them whether they wanted to fold another figure. The experimenter also explained that the participants would fill in a few questionnaires at the end of the meeting. Next, the experimenter showed the participant an example of a simple origami instruction and asked them to evaluate how difficult/challenging the task of origami folding would be for them (see subjective challenge measure). Each participant was then randomly assigned to one of the four experimental groups according to 2 (competence supported or not) x 2 (relatedness supported or not) experimental design.

The groups differed in the way the experimenter gave instructions on how to fold origami, how he commented on the results, and what he did with the origami which was folded (see needs manipulation procedure below). The rest of the procedure was the same for all the groups. After evaluating the subjective challenge, the experimenter asked the participants whether they wanted to fold the first origami, and if they agreed he gave them the choice of three origami figures to fold; the participant chose one and folded it. Then, the procedure was repeated until the participant said that they did not want to fold any more figures or they reached 10 figures folded (see performance measure). The time for folding origami was not limited, it took on average two to three minutes to fold each origami piece. After that the experimenter asked the participant to fill in a few questionnaires. Then the participant was paid for the number of puzzles they had decided to fold and was asked what they thought about the study and whether they had any questions. Then they were debriefed and thanked.

Needs manipulation procedure—competence . In the groups with enhanced competence need the experimenter gave the participants some short feedback after each of the first three origami puzzles had been folded and then after every second folded figure. The feedback consisted of short comments concerning the way the person folded the origami, for example: ’You’ve done it very skilfully’ or ’You’ve managed to put it together quickly’.

In the groups with no competence enhancement the experimenter gave a short comment after each of the first three origami puzzles had been folded and then after every second folded figure. The comment only concerned the general process of the experiment, for example: ’Ok, thank you’ or ’Ok, we will put it here’, so that the communication process was sustained but without any feedback on the competence.

Needs manipulation procedure—relatedness . In the groups with enhanced relatedness need, the experimenter asked the participants whether he / she could use the folded origami for a workshop he was holding with children the other day, and if the participant agreed, he put the folded origami into the box entitled ’materials for workshop’. All the further origami folded by the participant was also put into the box without any further comment. In the group with no relatedness enhancement the experimenter put all the figures folded by the participant into the box without an inscription and without any further comment.

Data analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 26 software (IBM Corporation, 2019) to compute ANOVA analysis, and Hayes PROCESS Macro v3.5 to compute mediation analyses.

To test the first hypothesis (H1) which was related to the role of competence and relatedness enhancement on task performance level, we ran bootstrapped two-way between-subjects ANOVA ( Table 1 ). There were significant main effects of competence and relatedness according to which enhancement of either competence or relatedness resulted in better task performance (a higher number of origami puzzles folded). Also, the combined effect (interaction) of these two factors was significant. An analysis of simple effects showed that out of four simple effects only one of them was not statistically significant. Within the group in which competence was not supported there was no significant difference ( p = .956, BCa 95% CI [-1.27, 1.26] between relatedness supported ( M = 4.52, SE = 0.48, Bias = .003, BCa 95% CI [3.68, 5.46]) or not supported ( M = 4.56, SE = 0.48, Bias = .010, BCa 95% CI [3.54, 5.56]) on the number of origami puzzles folded. Whenever competence was supported there was a significant difference ( p = .002, BCa 95% CI [-3.23, -0.95]) between relatedness not supported ( M = 5.96, SE = 0.48, Bias = -.015, BCa 95% CI [4.86, 7.07]) and supported ( M = 8.04, SE = 0.48, Bias = .017, BCa 95% CI [7.22, 8.84]). In the group in which relatedness was not supported there was a significant difference at statistical tendency ( p = .060, BCa 95% CI [-2.89, 0.13]) between situations in which competence was not supported ( M = 4.52, SE = 0.48, Bias = .003, BCa 95% CI [3.68, 5.46]) or when competence was supported ( M = 5.96, SE = 0.48, Bias = -.015, BCa 95% CI [4.86, 7.07]). Also, when relatedness was supported there was a significant difference ( p < .001, BCa 95% CI [-4.80, -2.22]) between a situation in which competence was not supported ( M = 4.56, SE = 0.48, Bias = .010, BCa 95% CI [3.54, 5.56]) in contrast to competence being supported ( M = 8.04, SE = 0.48, Bias = .017, BCa 95% CI [7.22, 8.84]). In summary, the highest number of origami puzzles folded occurred in groups in which both competence and relatedness were supported. However, support of any of these needs resulted in better task competition, with the role of competence supported definitely being more important than the role of relatedness. Thus, H1 was entirely confirmed.

N = 108, bootstrap = 2000.

Mediational hypotheses (H2 and H3) were tested using Model 4 in Process ver. 3.5 by Hayes (2018). Allied with H2, the relationship between the support of the need for competence and performance level was partly mediated by both intrinsic motivation and subjective challenge taken together as parallel mediators (overall indirect effect), ab = 0.74, BCa 95% CI [0.29, 1.28], and also separately by subjective challenge (particular indirect effect), ab = 0.38, BCa 95% CI [0.05, 0.82], and by intrinsic motivation (particular indirect effect), ab = 0.36, BCa 95% CI [0.06, 0.74] ( Fig 1 ). In summary, H2 was confirmed.

According to the testing of H3, the mediational effects both for the overall effect of combined mediators (overall indirect effect), ab = 0.36, BCa 95% CI [-0.11, 0.90], and well-being, ab = 0.11, BCa 95% CI [-0.24, 0.49] were not confirmed. However, there was a significant mediational effect of intrinsic motivation, ab = 0.127, BCa 95% CI [0.01, 0.63]. Thus, H3 was only partly supported by our results ( Fig 2 ).

In the first study we attempted to investigate the influence of two of the basic psychological needs (competence and relatedness) on performance. Furthermore, we tried to study the mechanisms of the relationship between the basic needs and performance. A novel and important element of this study was the coexistence of context factors which satisfied the needs with the simultaneous presence of salient external incentives.

In general, the results were in line with Hypothesis 1, which predicted that even with the presence of external incentives, the basic psychological needs impact performance. The positive impact of the need for competence was stronger than that of the relatedness, which corroborates the meta-analysis results in which the overall influence of competence was the strongest of all three needs [ 6 ] and the Sheldon and Filak’s experiment, where only competence predicted performance [ 13 ]. It is worth noting that the rewards received by the participants for folding origami puzzles were salient. The previous studies suggest that the overall need for satisfaction is lower when salient incentives are present [ 6 ]. This could be explained by the undermining effect lowering autonomous or intrinsic motivation for the task, when direct, easy to notice and understand incentives are present [ 37 , 50 ]. Still, the result of our study suggests that even when external rewards are present and salient, satisfaction of the needs may have a positive influence on performance.

The second hypothesis, stating that the relation between the need for competence and task performance is mediated by subjective evaluation of the level of difficulty (subjective challenge) and by the level of intrinsic motivation, has also been confirmed. Indeed, the influence of competence on performance was pa2rtially explained by the subjectively lower challenge of the task (making the task seemingly easier) which further resulted in higher performance. We believe that by giving positive feedback on participants’ competence, the new task they were doing was perceived as easier and as a consequence closer to their optimal level of challenge. Studies suggest that the challenge which is perceived as optimal (not too easy and not too difficult) is positively related to performance [ 20 , 51 , 52 ]. The second mediator, intrinsic motivation, explained the relation between competence and performance to a lesser extent (statistical tendency). According to SDT, intrinsic motivation is related to performance, especially in the qualitative task [ 25 ]. However, it is again worth noting that the results were achieved even with the presence of external rewards. Finally, both mediators explained only part of the relation, and the direct effect of competence on performance persisted, which may be explained by the rise of self-efficacy, which is a well-evidenced antecedent of performance, but which we did not measure in our study [ 41 ].

Hypothesis 3, stating that the relation between relatedness support and performance level will be mediated by the level of intrinsic motivation and well-being, has only been partially confirmed. Firstly, the influence of relatedness on performance was not strong (statistical tendency), and the relation was mediated inclusively and fully by the level of intrinsic motivation, but not by the level of well-being. The rise of intrinsic motivation, and as a consequence slightly better performance due to relatedness need support, is in line with the assumptions of the SDT [ 3 ]. The meta-analysis also showed that relatedness has a much smaller influence overall on performance than competence, which seems to be true also when the external incentives are present [ 6 ]. The lack of relation between the relatedness and well-being may be connected with the way the relatedness was manipulated in this study. Contrary to other studies, the relatedness was enhanced not by the ’good rapport’ between the experimenter and the participant [ 13 ], but by the promise of a socially useful purpose for the origami puzzles created during the experiment.

Two hundred young adults ( N = 119 females) took part in the study. The participants were students (on courses such as Educational Studies, Sociology, Engineering, English Philology, and Philosophy) and employees from different companies (e.g. recruitment staff, IT workers, teachers) aged 18–34 years ( M = 21.67, SD = 2.59). The protocol of the study was approved by the University’s Ethical Committee. Before participation all participants gave written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Task performance was measured by the sum of words found while playing Boggle in the first and second trials.

Basic psychological were assessed with the scale used by Sheldon for the experiment with needs manipulation [ 13 ]. The scale comprises of 9 items, three for each of the need. All items were administered with a 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) scale. The subscales have robust psychometric properties with alpha α = .70 (autonomy), α = .80 (competence), α = .81 (relatedness).

First, the participants were told that they would be taking part in a study about the use of games in research on learning, which would involve playing some kind of board game. Participants who agreed to take part signed in through a computer platform to come for a meeting at a specific date and time. The experiment took place in an individual meeting in a research room (this was the same for all participants) and lasted about 30 minutes for each participant. After entering the research room, the participants were informed that during the meeting they were going to learn how to play the game Boggle and fill in a few questionnaires. Furthermore, they were provided with informed consent with information about the anonymity of the results and voluntary participation. Each participant was then randomly assigned to one of the four groups align with 2 (reward / no reward) x 2 (needs supported vs needs frustrated) experiment design.

The groups differed in the way the experimenter gave instructions on how to play Boggle, how he commented on the results, and whether the participant received a reward for good performance (see the needs and reward manipulation procedures described below). The rest of the procedure was the same for all the groups and described below. The experimenter explained the rules of how to play Boggle to the participants, and that the higher the number of words the participant found, the better (see performance measurement). Then the participants played Boggle for the first time (the trial play) and subsequently a second time. The time for each player’s turn was limited to 3 minutes, as in the original rules of the game. After playing Boggle participants filled in the three questionnaires—the Intrinsic Motivation Questionnaire, and the Sheldon Needs Measure. Then the participants were asked what they thought about the study and whether they had any questions, and they were debriefed and thanked.

Reward manipulation procedure . After signing the informed consent in the groups where rewards were given to the participants, they were told that if they performed well during the Boggle game (i.e. they found more words than the average participant) they would receive a 45 PLN (approx. 10 EUR) voucher which could be used in the local grocery shop. At the end of the research, after filling in the questionnaires and before the debrief, all the participants from the reward group received the vouchers (they were told that they performed well, no matter if it was true or not). In the groups without reward the participants simply received information that the main rule of Boggle is that the more words you find the better.

Needs manipulation procedure (adjusted from Sheldon & Filak [ 13 ] ) . In the groups where the needs were enhanced , the instructions on how to play Boggle and the results of each turn were modified so that the three basic psychological needs were supported. The examples before the first game were as follows.

Before you begin, I would like you to remember that :

• People who start playing the game usually don’t manage to find too many words . Try to do your best , you will learn quickly , I have confidence in your ability (competence) .
• I would like you to know that you and your style of playing is important for us . Try to remember what kind of strategies you used during the game so we can talk about it later and use it as advice for other players (relatedness) .
• I would like you to play this game in your own way , try to get to know this game and play with it . You can choose one of the three matrices (autonomy) .

The instructions between the first and second game were:

• You quickly figured out how to play , you did well (competence) .
• Remember that you and your individual style of playing is important , try to remember your playing strategies for future participants (relatedness) .
• You can play this game using many different approaches , try to find those which suit you the best . Choose one of the matrices (three options) and tell me when you are ready to start (autonomy) .

In the groups with needs deprived the instructions on how to play Boggle and the results of each turn were modified so that the three basic psychological needs were frustrated. The examples before the first game were as follows.

• People who start playing the game usually don’t manage to find too many words , but maybe you will be lucky (competence) .
• In this study we are only interested in the group results as whole . Keep your observations to yourself as we go through the procedure (relatedness) .
• In this experiment you have to proceed exactly according to the instructions which experimenter will give you and play according to the rules . You will start with this matrix (no choice of matrix given) (autonomy) .

The instructions given between the first and second game were:

• Beginner’s luck or you weren’t lucky this time (no matter if the participant succeeded or not, luck instead of competence is emphasised—competence).
• (Not asking about the impressions or individual observations when such questions or comments are expected after the first trial game—relatedness).
• In the next game you will find words in this matrix . The time starts now (no matrix choice was given, and the participant started when the experimenter asked him/her to do so—autonomy).

Again, we started the analytical work with two-way between subjects bootstrapped ANOVA to test the first hypothesis in Study 2 (H4). Results are presented in Table 2 . The interaction effect of external incentives and needs supported was not significant, neither was the main effect of external incentives. The main effect of needs supported was significant and it indicated that the group with needs supported presented significantly better in task performance in comparison to the group without needs supported. This confirms H4 but does not confirm H5.

N = 200, bootstrap = 2000.

Based on mediational analysis with the four parallel mediators (intrinsic motivation, autonomy, competence, relatedness), H6 was partly confirmed ( Fig 3 ). The overall total effect was not significant, ab = 0.38, BCa 95% CI [-0.40, 1.22], as well a particular indirect effect for: intrinsic motivation, ab = 0.17, BCa 95% CI [-0.31, 0.71], autonomy, ab = -0.69, BCa 95% CI [-1.31, -0.14], relatedness, ab = 0.01, BCa 95% CI [-0.13, 0.16], except for a significant indirect effect for competence, ab = 0.89, BCa 95% CI [0.24, 1.63] ( Fig 3 ). Competence was a significant mediator of the relationship between needs support and task performance. In conclusion, H6 was only partly confirmed.

In Study 2 we investigated the influence of the basic psychological needs (a context which either supported or frustrated the needs) and rewards on performance (which were either present or absent). Furthermore, we studied the mechanisms of the needs–performance relationship. A novel and important element of this study was the coexistence of context factors which satisfied the needs, with the simultaneous presence of salient external incentives. The results confirmed Hypothesis 4 which stated that supported basic psychological needs will have a higher level of performance in the accomplished task than the groups without support. The satisfaction of needs corroborates the results of studies where needs increase performance [ 6 ]. However, our further mediational analysis, which was a consequence of verifying Hypothesis 6, and which stated that the relationship between the needs support and performance level will be mediated by the level of intrinsic motivation and the self-reported level of basic psychological needs, was only partially confirmed. The analysis showed that the context which supported the needs during the experiment worked only on the needs of competence and autonomy, and out of these two needs only competence had a positive impact on performance and the need for autonomy, to our surprise, had a negative effect on performance. The meta-analysis suggests that the satisfaction of all three needs should have a positive impact on performance, with competence being its strongest predictor [ 6 ]. However, in the experiment conducted by [ 13 ] out of three needs only competence was a strong predictor of performance. It is especially worth noting, as in the current study, both the elements of the manipulation and the measure of performance (the Boggle game) were adjusted from the Sheldon and Filak [ 13 ] study.

Some studies suggest that autonomy has no impact on performance. For example, although the implementation of autonomous workgroups in a manufacturing environment resulted in a higher and lasting job satisfaction for employees, it had no consequences for work performance [ 53 ]. The findings of Saragih [ 54 ] can explain this. She showed that it is the self-efficacy that mediated the relationship between job autonomy and job performance. The question is whether enhancing the autonomy need might lead to a deterioration of the self-efficacy in certain situations (for example during performing a new task) and negatively impact performance. Moreover [ 55 ], found that the need for autonomy is associated with an avoidance of restrictive environments (such as constraints and rules). This suggests that the motivating role of the autonomy might be limited to some conditions. We can ask what if the aim of the task is entertaining (to take part in a study, play a game) and time is limited? The participants of Study 2, in the enhanced needs condition, were encouraged to experiment with the game Boggle (as a part of autonomy support), which they were playing for the first time and where the game itself lasted for a short time (2x3 minutes), even if they enjoyed the ’given autonomy’ in playing, they might have a need for more instructional (and less autonomous) forms of interaction, and an explanation of how to play, in order to play it correctly [ 56 ]. On the other hand, the explanation may be different, for the new task, the participants might have not taken the ownership of the action, which authors of SDT suggest is crucial for the support of the need of autonomy. The participants of the study took part in a new activity in a new environment and they were looking at the experimenter to guide them, even though he or she wanted to provide them more freedom of choice [ 6 , 8 ].

Similar explanation may be offered to explain why the manipulation did not affect the relatedness need. The relatedness need support instruction was based on emphasising the interest of the experimenter in the participants’ strategies of playing the game and their usefulness for other participants. However, giving participants autonomy during the game might have been perceived as leaving them without actual support (not telling them how to play a new game). Furthermore, the manipulation had a positive effect on intrinsic motivation, which is in line with the results. Nevertheless, the intrinsic motivation was not associated with higher performance. The participants of the study felt inherent enjoyment in playing the game, but this did not translate into performance. In other words, if participants had more time for autonomous experimentation (enhanced autonomy) and inherent enjoyment of playing the game (intrinsic motivation) with time their performance would probably be also positively affected [ 3 ].

Another hypothesis (H5) stating that individuals who were granted external incentives will have a higher level of performance than the groups without incentives in the accomplished task, was not confirmed by our study. The hypothesis was formulated based on both SDT, which states that incentives build external forms of motivation [ 3 ] and studies and meta-analyses of incentive–performance relationships from outside SDT [ 31 , 35 ]. We suggest that the reward for good performance might have caused the participants to focus on the reward instead of on the game and caused them to feel the additional stress of trying to earn the reward. Such results were confirmed in some earlier studies [ 57 – 59 ]. As a consequence, the reward’s positive motivational influence was eliminated by the additional stress that it caused.

General discussion and conclusions

In the series of two studies, we tried to investigate the simultaneous impact of incentives and basic psychological needs on performance. Both studies confirmed that the need for competence had the strongest positive influence on performance. Study 1 showed that support of competence can influence performance directly, as well as through the decreasing subjective difficulty of the task and through increasing intrinsic motivation. These results are in line with earlier studies which did not, however, include extrinsic incentives in the study design [ 6 , 13 ]. The need for autonomy (which was investigated only in Study 2) had a negative impact on performance. We assume that we achieved this effect mainly due to the fact that participants were taking part in a new and short task, which perhaps required a less autonomous, and more instructional kind of support from the experimenter in order to increase the participants’ effectiveness, or more time for the participants [ 56 ]. Relatedness had a low positive impact on performance in Study 1 (fully mediated by intrinsic motivation) and no impact in Study 2. Out of the three needs, the meta-analysis showed that relatedness is the least correlated to performance [ 6 ], and the study by [ 13 ] showed no impact of relatedness on performance.

Summing up we can draw a few conclusions from the two conducted studies:

• in the context of performance (even when the external incentives are present) competence is the strongest and most certain predictor of performance,
• relatedness and autonomy need more study in order to check their impact on performance. It is worth studying autonomy in different types of tasks (especially comparing new vs. known tasks), and both autonomy and relatedness are worth studying with tasks which last longer than in our study,
• in general, the impact of needs and incentives on performance are worth studying simultaneously, as this is how they co-exist in ’real life’ (i.e. outside the laboratory),
• in educational, occupational and sports contexts, where external incentives are the basic motivators (grades, bonuses, rewards) it is worth to introduce some interventions which may increase the support of the competence need (trainings, feedback, coaching) in order to increase individual performance of students, employees or athletes. The increase of competence support may influence the performance to a greater extent than the support of other needs. It is worth noting however, that in our study we investigated the influence of needs during the task which was interesting (games, putting together origami) and involved some cognitive capabilities and the results may not apply to the context of more imitative or reproductive kind of work (e.g. endurance type of sports or working at the assembly line).

Study limitations and further research suggestion

Although, in general, the results confirmed most of our expectations, more research in this field is still needed. The biggest limitation of Study 1 is its sample. This study should be replicated with a more diversified and bigger sample of participants. In Study 2 it would be beneficial to divide the needs supported group into three separate groups where three basic psychological needs would be manipulated separately.

Supporting information

Funding statement.

MS 2017/01/X/HS6/01822 Polish Ministry of Education (NCN) The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Data Availability

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

33 Self-Determination

Michael L. Wehmeyer, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas

Karrie A. Shogren, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas

Todd D. Little, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas

Nicole Adams, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas

• Published: 06 June 2017
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

Self-determination refers to self- (vs. other-) caused action—to people acting volitionally. “Human agency” refers to the sense of personal empowerment involving both knowing and having what it takes to achieve goals. Human agentic theories share the view that organismic aspirations drive human behaviors. An “organismic” perspective of self-determination that views people as active contributors to, or authors of, their behavior provides a foundation for examining and facilitating the degree to which people become self-determined and the impact of that on their pursuit of well-being. An organismic approach requires a focus on the interface between the self and context. This chapter discusses the self-determination construct within an organismic perspective, surveys the construct’s history and usage in philosophy and psychology, summarizes theories of motivation and causal action, and provides a framework for understanding its development. Research implications based upon existing knowledge and research in self-determination and positive psychology are identified.

Self-Determination

Self-determination and human agency.

Ryan and Deci ( 2000a ) asserted that, in the pursuit for understanding optimal human functioning and well-being, researchers must take into account the “agentic” nature of human action. This chapter examines self-determination as a general psychological construct within the organizing structure of theories of human agency. Human agency is “the sense of personal empowerment, which involves both knowing and having what it takes to achieve one’s goals” (Little, Hawley, Henrich, & Marsland, 2002 , p. 390). An “agentic” person is the

origin of his or her actions, has high aspirations, perseveres in the face of obstacles, sees more and varied options for action, learns from failures, and overall, has a greater sense of well-being. In contrast, a non-agentic individual can be a pawn to unknown extra-personal influences, has low aspirations, is hindered with problem-solving blinders, often feels helpless and, overall, has a greater sense of ill-being. — ( Little et al ., 2002 , p. 390)

Human agentic theories “share the meta-theoretical view that organismic aspirations drive human behaviors” (Little, Snyder, & Wehmeyer, 2006 , p. 61). An organismic perspective views people as active contributors to, or authors of their behavior, where “behavior” is described as self-regulated and goal-directed action. Such actions are defined as purposive and self-initiated activities (Brandtstädter, 1998 ; Chapman, 1984 ; Harter, 1999 ). As outlined by Little et al. ( 2006 ), human agentic actions are:

motivated by biological and psychological needs (Deci & Ryan, 2000 , 2002 ; Hawley, 1999 ; Hawley & Little, 2002 ; Little et al., 2002 );

directed toward self-regulated goals that service short- and long-term biological and psychological needs;

propelled by understandings of links among agents, means, and ends (Chapman, 1984 ; Little, 1998 ; Skinner, 1995 , 1996 ) and guided by general action-control behaviors that entail self-chosen forms and functions (Little, Lopez, & Wanner, 2001 ; Skinner & Edge, 2002 ; Vanlede, Little, & Card, 2006 );

those that precipitate self-determined governance of behavior and development, which can be characterized as hope-related individual differences; and

are triggered, executed, and evaluated in contexts that provide supports and opportunities for, as well as hindrances and impediments to, goal pursuit.

An organismic approach to self-determination requires an explicit focus on the interface between the self and context (Little et al., 2002 ). Organisms influence and are influenced by the contexts in which they live and develop. Through this person–context interaction, people become agents of their own action.

Assumptions of Theories of Human Agency

Theories of human agency differ from other frameworks for understanding human behavior (e.g., theories that emphasize stimulus–response accounts of behavior) because of the assumption underlying all theories of human agency that each person is integral to his/her organismic functioning. Unlike stimulus–response theories, which, by and large, assume that stimuli in the environment drive behavior, agentic theories assume that the person actively shapes his or her environment and responses to that environment. Contextual factors are still highly relevant, as contexts provide supports and opportunities as well as hindrances and impediments for volitional and agentic action, but it is the individual and their drive to act as a causal agent (not environmental stimuli) that is the primary driver of behavior. People who consistently engage in causal action to exert causal agency are self-determined. Specifically, as individuals strive to meet basic psychological and biological needs, they engage in self-regulated, goal-directed action, or causal action , that enables them to navigate varying environmental and contextual challenges, and they become more effective in their causal action and develop a sense of causal agenc y and enhanced self-determination.

The process of engaging in causal action has a self-evaluative feedback process, where persons continuously interpret and evaluate their actions and the consequences of actions. This meta-cognitive monitoring shapes, on an ongoing basis, each individual’s action-control beliefs about the activities that he or she is capable of in varying contexts. Specifically, people are always learning under what conditions their causal actions will have desired effects. Under optimal circumstances, this continually evolving and actively monitored self-system gives rise to a strong, integrated sense of causal agency—a self-determined person. A highly self-determined person is the primary origin of his or her actions, has high aspirations, perseveres in the face of obstacles, sees more and varied options, learns from failures, and has a strong sense of well-being. A less self-determined person is shaped by extra-personal influences, has low aspirations, struggles with problem-solving and goal-setting, and often feels hopeless. Thus, theories of human agency have an explicit focus on the person–environment fit. It is in the context of this interaction between personal competencies and environmental demands that people become agents of their own action or causal agents over their lives, and, ultimately, self-determined.

In addition to the assumptions regarding organismic aspirations and contextual influences, theories of human agency also assume that:

Actions are motivated by both biological and psychological needs.

When actions are directed toward self-regulated goals, this serves biological and psychological needs, both short-term and long-term.

Actions are volitional and agentic and shaped by understandings about general action-control behaviors that entail self-chosen forms and functions (Deci & Ryan, 2002 ; Little et al., 2002 ).

In the following sections, we will discuss the origins of the self-determination context, and discuss theories of motivation and causal action that explain the enervation and development of self-determination.

Origins of the Self-Determination Construct

Self-determination in philosophy.

The self-determination construct’s origins lie in philosophy and discourse about the doctrines of determinism and free will . Determinism is the philosophical doctrine positing that events, such as human behavior, are effects of preceding causes. John Locke ( 1690 ) provided a synopsis of the free will problem :

This proposition “men can determine themselves” is drawn in or inferred from this, “that they shall be punished in the other world.” For here the mind, seeing the connexion there is between the idea of men’s punishment in the other world and the idea of God punishing; between God punishing and the justice of the punishment; between justice of punishment and guilt; between guilt and a power to do otherwise; between a power to do otherwise and freedom; and between freedom and self-determination, sees the connexion between men and self-determination — ( Locke , 1690 , np) .

Locke was a soft determinist ; that is, someone who saw both causality and volition, or will, at work in human behavior. According to Locke, the human mind has the active power of beginning or ceasing its own operations as activated by a preference. The exercise of that power is volition or will. Freedom or liberty is “the power to act on our volition, whatever it may be, without any external compulsion or restraint” (Locke, 1690 ). Human beings act freely insofar as they are capable of translating their mental preferences into actual performance of the action in question (Kemerling, 2000–2001 ). Freedom is conceptualized as the human capacity to act (or not) as we choose or prefer, without any external compulsion or restraint. Locke’s proposals about the causes of human action as both caused and volitional are important to an organismic theory of self-determination, as is his soft deterministic distinction that it is the “agent” (the person) who is free to act, not the action itself (since it is caused by perception or sensation).

Self-Determination in Personality Psychology

In Foundations for a Science of Personality ( 1941 ), Angyal proposed that an essential feature of a living organism is its autonomy, where “autonomous” means self-governing or governed from inside. According to Angyal, an organism “lives in a world in which things happen according to laws which are heteronomous (e.g., governed from outside) from the point of view of the organism” (p. 33), and that “organisms are subjected to the laws of the physical world, as is any other object of nature, with the exception that it can oppose self-determination to external determination” (p. 33).

Angyal ( 1941 ) suggested that the “science of personality” is the study of two essential determinants to human behavior: autonomous determinism (self-determination) and heteronomous determinism (other-determined). Angyal placed primary importance for laying the foundation for a science of personality on the fact that a central process of an organism is the movement toward autonomous determination, noting that “without autonomy, without self-government, the life process could not be understood” (p. 34). Furthermore, Angyal’s ( 1941 ) use of the term autonomy moved away from the hard determinism that then dominated psychology, led by operant psychologists, toward a soft determinism that considered the importance of both actor and context.

Self-determination , then, as a psychological construct, refers to self- (vs. other-) caused action—it refers to people’s acting volitionally, based on their own will. Volition is the capability of making a conscious choice or decision, and having a conscious intention (italics added, Gove, 1967 ). “Volitional behavior,” then, implies intent. Self-determined behavior is volitional, intentional, and self-caused or self-initiated.

Theories of Self-Determination

Self-determination theory.

Self-determination theory (SDT) is a highly visible and comprehensive macro-theory developed by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan to explain the origins and outcomes of human agentic action (Deci & Vansteenkiste, 2004 ; Vansteenkiste, Niemiec, & Soenens, 2012 ). Standing in contrast to theories that stress the dependence of behavior on environmental contingencies, SDT is based on the organismic paradigm ; one that assumes an inherent order in both biological and psychological systems (Ryan, 1995 ). SDT is a macro-theory of motivation, personality, and functioning that perceives human behavior as growth-oriented and pro-active (Deci & Vansteenkiste, 2004 ; Deci & Ryan, 2012a ). According to this theory, human behavior is also explained in terms of interactions between the individual and his or her social environment (Deci & Vansteenkiste, 2004 ).

The origin of SDT is credited to decades of empirical investigations of the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivations. These studies examined the effects of external rewards on study participants’ intrinsic motivation for an assigned task (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999 ). The effects of extrinsic rewards on autonomous motivation can be understood in terms of both basic psychological needs satisfaction and deCharms’ ( 1968 ) “perceived locus of causality” (Ryan & Deci, 2000a ). According to SDT, the three basic psychological needs—competence, autonomy, and relatedness—must be met in order to support healthy psychological development (Deci & Ryan, 2012a ). Deci and Vansteenkiste ( 2004 ) explained the need for competence as reflecting individuals’ desire to effectively master their environment, and the need for autonomy as a desire to feel an integrated sense of self through choice, agency, and volition. The need for relatedness refers to a sense of belonging and connectedness with others; to care and be cared for (Ryan & Deci, 2002 ). Deci and Ryan would eventually incorporate basic psychological needs into one of five mini-theories to explain the operations of self-determination theory in a complex social world (Deci & Ryan, 2012a ). The five mini-theories—cognitive evaluative theory, causality orientations theory, organismic integration theory, basic psychological needs theory, and goal content theory—each explain a set of observed motivation phenomena in many domains (Ryan & Deci, 2002 ).

Motivation research uncovered variations in responses to experimental manipulations and observational contexts, indicating that self-determined behavior is a multidimensional construct. Deci and Ryan ( 2012a ) introduced cognitive evaluation theory (CET) to explain the types of external events that would enhance or diminish intrinsic motivation, to identify autonomy-supportive social contexts versus controlling social contexts, and to explain the interactions of external events and social contexts and their effects on intrinsic motivation. To further explain individual differences in motivation-related behavior, Deci and Ryan ( 2012a ) proposed a new mini-theory, focusing on trait-like motivational orientations. Causality orientations theory (COT) proposes three different personality orientations based on the source of initiation and regulation of behavior; autonomous, controlled, and impersonal (Deci & Ryan, 1985a ). The autonomous orientation is associated with orienting towards internal and external cues in a way that supports one’s autonomy and aids in attending to the informational significance of these cues to assist in regulating one’s action. The controlled orientation is associated with perceiving internal and external cues as controlling and demanding. Finally, the impersonal orientation is associated with perceiving cues as indicators of incompetence and is linked with amotivation.

A third, related mini-theory under SDT is known as organismic integration theory (OIT). Deci and Ryan ( 1985a ) formulated this theory to explain behavior that is externally motivated but also either controlled or autonomous. The researchers recognized that motivation existed on a continuum, and depended on an individual’s traits and the environmental and social context. Deci and Ryan ( 1985a ) proposed five types of motivation on a continuum from “extrinsic” to “intrinsic,” thought of as reasons for engaging in behaviors. These are external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation, integrated regulation , and intrinsic motivation . Researchers have used this theory to demonstrate desirable behaviors that are more highly internally regulated tend to be maintained. Also, it was found that more autonomous regulation was associated with positive outcomes such as wellness, engagement, and perceived competence (Deci & Ryan, 2012a ).

As research evidence accumulated for these mini-theories, Deci and Ryan ( 2012a ) noted continued evidence for the importance of the three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. The researchers formalized a theory, the basic psychological needs theory (BPNT), based on findings that environments and contexts that supported psychological needs satisfaction were associated with greater feelings of well-being, psychological health, and greater positive affect in both work and non-work-related environments (Ryan, Bernstein, & Brown, 2010 ).

As a further development to the psychological needs-fulfillment work, Deci, Ryan, and colleagues gathered evidence for the importance of the contents and targets of goals that people pursue. Goal content theory (GCT) posits that extrinsic goals such as financial wealth, image, and fame are less likely to satisfy the three basic psychological needs than are intrinsic goals such as personal growth and emotional closeness (Sheldon, Ryan, Deci, & Kasser, 2004 ). Empirical evidence for GCT indicates that pursuing extrinsic goals leads to less well-being and poorer performance, whereas pursuing intrinsic goals leads to greater well-being; presumably due to increased satisfaction of the basic psychological needs (Deci & Ryan, 2012a ).

With motivation, choice, and attribution as SDT’s fundamental theoretical bases, a substantial empirical tradition has arisen from research in this area. SDT has been applied to study diverse social issues such as health behavior and maintenance, education and school adjustment, psychotherapy, and sports and physical activity (Chen & Bozeman, 2013 ; Curran, Hill, & Niemiec, 2013 ; Gourlan, Sarrazin, & Trouilloud, 2013 ; Liu, Wang, Kee, Koh, Lim, & Chua, 2014 ; Vansteenkiste, Claes, Soenens, & Verstuyf, 2013 ). Recent findings in each of these domains provide additional information about the operation of the multiple dimensions of SDT constructs as predictors of external behavior, internal states, and other distal outcomes. For example, recent work by Bruzzese, Idalski Carcone, Lam, Ellis, and Naar-King ( 2014 ) suggested that the psychological need for relatedness is important in predicting young African Americans’ adherence to asthma-medication regimens. Interestingly, however, in this study, contrary to SDT assumptions, the perceived importance of the regimen did not predict adherence over and above other SDT variables, suggesting that in certain health domains, autonomous motivation does not exert an independent influence on behavior.

Other important findings in recent SDT applications include the effects of internal feedback on students’ perceptions of their understanding of college-level lectures, as well as their emotions following lectures. Oliver, Markland, and Hardy ( 2010 ) assessed undergraduate students’ self-talk following a lecture on research methods. According to cognitive evaluative theory , one of the five SDT mini-theories, students construe their self-talk as informational or controlling, depending on the functional significance the individual attaches to their inner dialogue. The perceived informational or controlling nature of this dialogue has important consequences for anxiety and affect. Oliver and colleagues found that students who evaluated their inner dialogue as informational were more likely to report positive affect following the lecture, independent of the students’ understanding of the lecture material. Conversely, controlling self-talk was found to be associated with higher state anxiety following the lecture.

Similar to outcomes in education, contextual factors and social influences play a significant role for motivation in the sports and physical activity domains. An important aspect of determining sports behavior engagement is the coaches’ role in creating an autonomy-supportive atmosphere for athletes. Using SDT as a framework for predicting behavioral engagement, Curran et al. ( 2013 ) found that structure provided by coaches (information, strategy, limits, and expectations) in an autonomy-supportive manner fostered ideal conditions for satisfaction of basic psychological needs and was associated with higher levels of behavioral engagement and lower levels of behavioral disaffection.

As discussed, SDT provides a multidimensional view of the effects of goal purposes and contents on individuals’ behavior, well-being, performance, and social engagement. As an extension, the five mini-theories discussed here provide an account for the complex interactions of environmental and contextual cues with personal traits and learned behaviors in a variety of behavioral domains. Thus, the foundational concept of intrinsic versus extrinsic goal engagement provides a detailed framework for understanding human agency.

Causal Agency Theory

Drawing on the foundational understanding of self-determination as: (1) self-caused action from philosophy; (2) a central process of an organism in the movement toward autonomous determination, from personality psychology; and (3) motivated by the basic psychological needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness from SDT, Wehmeyer, Shogren, and colleagues (Shogren, Wehmeyer, Palmer, Forber-Pratt, Little, & Lopez, 2015 ) proposed causal agency theory to explain how people become self-determined; that is, how they define the actions and beliefs necessary to engage in self-caused, autonomous action that addresses basic psychological needs.

Within the context of causal agency theory, Shogren and colleagues define “self-determination” as a

dispositional characteristic manifested as acting as the causal agent in one’s life. Self-determined people (i.e., causal agents) act in service to freely chosen goals. Self-determined actions function to enable a person to be the causal agent is his or her life. — ( Shogren et al ., 2015 , p. 256)

A dispositional characteristic is an enduring tendency used to characterize and describe differences between people; it refers to a tendency to act or think in a particular way, but presumes contextual variance (i.e., socio-contextual supports and opportunities and threats and impediments). As a dispositional characteristic, self-determination can be measured, and variance will be observed across individuals and within individuals over time, particularly as the context changes (e.g., as supports and opportunities are provided for self-determined action).

Broadly defined, causal agency implies that it is the individual who makes or causes things to happen in his or her life. Causal agency implies more, however, than just causing action; it implies that the individual acts with an eye toward causing an effect to accomplish a specific end or to cause or create change . Self-determined actions enable a person to act as a causal agent.

Self-Caused Action vs. Control

Organismic theories differentiate between self-determination as self- caused action and self-determination as controlling one’s behavior. As Deci ( 2004 ) observed, “the concept of personal control… refers to having control over outcomes” (p. 23). Control is defined as “authority, power, or influence over events, behaviors, situations, or people” (VandenBos, 2007 , p. 228). “Self-determined action” does not imply control over events or outcomes. Instead, it refers to the degree to which action is self-caused; that is, the degree to which behavior is volitional and agentic , driven by beliefs about the relationships between actions (or means) and ends.

Within causal agency theory, self-determined action is characterized by three essential characteristics—volitional action, causal action, and action-control beliefs. These essential characteristics refer, not to specific actions performed or the beliefs that drive action, but to the function the action serves for the individual; that is, whether the action enabled the person to act as a causal agent:

Volitional Action

Self-determined people act volitionally. Volition refers to making a conscious choice based upon one’s preferences. “Conscious choice” implies intentionality; self-determined actions are intentionally conceived, deliberate acts that occur without direct external influence. As such, volitional actions are self-initiated and function to enable a person to act autonomously (i.e., engage in self-governed action). Volitional actions involve the initiation and activation of causal capabilities—the capacity to cause something to happen—and something to happen in one’s life.

Agentic Action

An agent is someone who acts; a means by which something is done or achieved. “Agency” refers to action in the service of a goal. Self-determined people act to identify pathways that lead to specific ends or cause or create change. The identification of pathways is a proactive, purposive process. As such, agentic actions are self-regulated and self-directed. Such actions function to enable a person to make progress toward freely chosen goals and respond to opportunities and challenges in their environments. Such actions involve agentic capabilities; the capacity to direct it to achieve an outcome.

Action-Control Beliefs

Self-determined people have a sense of personal empowerment; they believe they have what it takes to achieve freely chosen goals. There are three types of action-control beliefs: beliefs about the link between the self and the goal (control expectancy; “When I want to do ____, I can”); beliefs about the link between the self and the means for achieving the goal (capacity beliefs; “I have the capabilities to do _____”); and beliefs about the utility or usefulness of a given means for attaining a goal (causality beliefs; “I believe my effort will lead to goal achievement” vs. “I believe other factors—luck, access to teachers, or social capital—will lead to goal achievement”). Positive action-control beliefs function to enable a person to act with self-awareness and self-knowledge in an empowered, goal-directed manner.

Socio-Contextual Influences

People who are causal agents respond to challenges (opportunities or threats) to their self-determination by employing causal and agentic actions, supported by action-control beliefs. This leads to self-determined action that allows them to initiate and direct their behavior to achieve a desired change or maintain a preferred circumstance or situation. In response to challenges, causal agents use a goal-generation process leading to the identification and prioritization of needed actions. The person frames the most urgent action need in terms of a goal state, and engages in a goal-discrepancy analysis to compare current status with goal status. The outcome of this analysis is a goal-discrepancy problem to be solved. The person then engages in a capacity–challenge discrepancy analysis in which capacity to solve the goal discrepancy problem is evaluated. The person maximizes adjustment in capacity (e.g., acquires new or refines existing skills and knowledge) or adjusts the challenge presented to create a “just-right match” between capacity and challenge in order to optimize the probability of solving the goal discrepancy problem.

Next, the person creates a discrepancy-reduction plan by setting causal expectations, making choices and decisions about strategies to reduce the discrepancy between the current status and goal status. When sufficient time has elapsed, the person engages in a second goal-discrepancy analysis, using information gathered through self-monitoring to self-evaluate progress toward reducing the discrepancy between current and goal status. If progress is satisfactory, they will continue implementing the discrepancy reduction plan. If not, the person either reconsiders the discrepancy reduction plan and modifies that, or returns to the goal generation process to reexamine the goal and its priority and, possibly, cycle through the process with a revised or new goal.

Development of Self-Determination

The assumptions inherent in theories of human agentic action and research and theory in motivation (SDT) and causal action (Causal Agency Theory) create an organizational framework for a theoretical model of the development of self-determination (see Figure 33.1 ).

The development of self-determination.

At the start of this system are basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness proposed by SDT. Satisfaction of these basic needs facilitates autonomous motivation , defined as intrinsic motivation and well-internalized extrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2012b , p. 88). Consistent with assumptions of organismic theories, the interplay between the context and the individual’s psychological needs-satisfaction is complex and reciprocal. When a motive or motives are salient, people are in a position to select goals on the basis of their expectations about the satisfaction of these motives (Deci & Ryan, 1985b , p. 235). As per Figure 33.1 , these psychological needs initiate a causal action sequence that, through interaction with environmental supports and opportunities, enables the development of a “synergistic set of action-control beliefs and behaviors that provide the self-regulatory foundation that is called upon to negotiate the various tasks and challenges of the life course” (Little et al, 2002 , p. 396). Action-control beliefs about the link between the self and the goal (control expectancy beliefs), about the links between the self and the means that are available for use to address a challenge (agency beliefs), and about which specific means are most effective for reaching one’s goals (causality beliefs) (Little et al., 2002 , p. 396) interact with and mediate volitional and agentic actions (employing causal and agentic capabilities), resulting in causal agency. Repeated experiences with the causal action sequence lead to multiple experiences with causal agency and, as a result, enhanced self-determination. In the following sections, we describe each of these contributors to the development of self-determination in greater depth.

Psychological and Biological Needs

As mentioned previously, a fundamental assumption of human agentic theories is that actions are motivated by both psychological and biological needs, and that if psychological and biological needs are addressed overall, well-being is supported. For this discussion, we are focusing on the psychological needs that motivate causal action, but, of course, biological needs also motivate action. In terms of biological needs, an assumption of human agentic theories is that all organisms require resources for physical growth and development (Hawley, 1999 ; Little et al., 2002 ). These resources create an appetite for biological needs; however, to meet biological needs, there is an evolutionary duality that shapes action in pursuit of resources. On one hand, people can participate in social groups, using social connections and capital to acquire needed resources. This social group, however, can also become a source of competition as multiple people in the social group pursue resources. Within social groups, therefore, people experience both supports and threats to the attainment of resources. Ethologists describe this duality as a dominance hierarchy . Hawley ( 1999 ) further defined such hierarchies as the emergent ordering of individuals based on their relative competitive abilities. People that become highly agentic are more likely to attain needed resources, whereas those with less developed causal agency experience fewer opportunities to access resources (Hawley, 1999 ; Little et al., 2002 ). Thus, contextual factors interact with the pursuit of resources to meet biological needs that shape the development of personal agency. Essentially, as people are able to meet their biological needs, they learn the types of volitional and agentic actions that enable them to access needed resources. They learn that goals can be set and met, that they can influence their environment, and that their future efforts are likely to be successful (Hawley & Little, 2002 ). This cyclical process is why biological needs (and psychological needs, discussed subsequently) are fundamental elements to the development of causal agency and self-determination.

Of particular focus in this text, human agentic theories also assume that there are basic psychological needs—organismic necessities for psychological growth, integrity, and wellness—that shape the development of self-determination, result in autonomous motivation, and motivate causal action (volitional action, agentic action, and action control beliefs). As mentioned previously, SDT describes three fundamental psychological needs: competence, relatedness , and autonomy (Deci & Ryan, 2002 ). SDT assumes that social contexts motivate human action to meet these basic psychological needs. The need for competence is defined as the need to successfully engage with, manipulate, and negotiate the environment. The need for relatedness reflects the desire for close emotional bonds and feelings of connectedness to others in the social world. The need for autonomy reflects the need to feel that one’s actions are predicated on the self or volitional in nature (Vansteenkiste & Ryan, 2013 ). Together, these basic psychological needs serve as the “energizer of behavior” (Deci & Ryan, 2012b , p. 101), or, in this theoretical model of the development of self-determination, the autonomous motivation that energizes causal action.

As organisms take action to meet these three basic psychological needs, this energizes the development of autonomous motivation , consisting of intrinsic motivation (doing an activity because it is enjoyable) and/or internalized extrinsic motivation (doing an activity because it leads to a valued consequence separate from the activity itself) (Deci & Ryan, 2012b , p. 88). The interaction between the organism’s efforts to meet basic psychological needs and the resultant autonomous motivation stimulates causal action, discussed in the next section.

Causal Agency

The interaction between the organism’s efforts to meet basic psychological needs and the resultant autonomous motivation, and the environmental conditions of opportunity or threat, stimulates causal action, beginning with “self-perceptions about the means and competencies one has to reach one’s goals” (Little et al., 2002 , p. 396). These self-perceptions are articulated through a set of action-control beliefs. These self-regulatory beliefs involve control expectancy beliefs, agency beliefs, and causality beliefs.

Control Expectancy Beliefs

Control expectancy beliefs “reflect the general expectations about the link between the self and the goal” (Little, Snyder, Wehmeyer, 2006 , p. 70); they reflect “the general perception of the degree to which a person feels that he or she can attain a given goal” (Little et al., 2002 , p. 396).

Agency Beliefs

Agency beliefs “reflect the links between the self and the various means that are relevant for attaining a chosen end” (Little et al., 2006 ; p. 71); they are “beliefs about whether these means are personally available for use” (Little et al., 2002 , p. 396).

Causality Beliefs

Causality beliefs “reflect general views of the utility or usefulness of a given means such as efforts, luck, or ability for attaining a particular goal” (Little et al., 2006 ; p. 71); they are “judgments about which specific means are most effective for reaching one’s goals” (Little et al., 2002 , p. 396).

Causal Action

Causal action is energized by the organism’s response to meet basic psychological needs, and the resultant autonomous motivation, and it is mediated and supported by action control beliefs. Causal action involves both volitional and agentic action. Volitional action is defined as making conscious choices based on one’s preferences, and engaging in self-initiated actions that promote autonomy. Agentic action refers to the process of identifying pathways that lead to specific ends and engaging in self-directing and self-regulating action to navigate environmental opportunities and threats. The primary operators in propelling volitional and agentic action involve the ability to perform causal actions or behaviors, subdivided into causal capability and agentic capability. Capability refers to the condition of being capable; that is, having requisite mental or physical capacity to accomplish a particular task .

Two types of capabilities are important to causal action and causal agency: causal capability and agentic capability. These capabilities differentiate between the two aspects of causal action; (1) causing something to happen (e.g., volitional action), and (2) directing that action toward a preferred end (e.g., agentic action).

This sequence of volitional and agentic action, which is goal-mediated and self-regulated, leads to experiences of causal agency, which mediate future responses by the organism to meet basic psychological needs. Repeated experiences of causal agency result in enhanced self-determination.

Conclusions

That self-determination is a critical construct to the study of a positive psychology seems self-evident. An organismic perspective of self-determination that views people as active contributors to, or “authors” of, their behavior, where behavior is self-regulated and goal-directed, provides a compelling foundation for examining and facilitating the degree to which people become “causal agents” in their lives. The theoretical frameworks reviewed in this chapter provide both compelling evidence to support the relevance of the construct to positive psychology, as well as multiple perspectives from which to consider further research or intervention development.

Research stemming from SDT strives to differentiate between proactive and reactive psychological processes. Proactive processes are those that support the growth of human potential; reactive processes (in terms of their lack of support for growth and well-being) are defensive, subsequent to threats toward basic needs (Ryan & Deci, 2000b ). This approach to proactive and reactive processes corresponds with the tenets of positive psychology, and as the theory is applied in a broader range of settings and with more diverse populations, the field of positive psychology will advance concurrently.

Research stemming from the causal agency theory emphasizes the interaction between opportunity and capacity in self-determined action, and the role of self-regulated problem-solving and goal-discrepancy analysis to achieve greater self-determination (Shogren, Palmer, Wehmeyer, Williams-Diehm, & Little, 2012 ; Shogren, Wehmeyer, Palmer, Rifenbark, & Little, 2015 ; Wehmeyer, Palmer, Agran, Mithaug, & Martin, 2000 ; Wehmeyer, Palmer, Shogren, Williams-Diehm, & Soukup, 2012 ; Wehmeyer, Shogren, Palmer, Williams-Diehm, Little, & Boulton, 2012 ). Research by Shogren, Lopez, Wehmeyer, Little, and Pressgrove ( 2006 ) explores the interrelationships among self-determination and other positive psychology constructs, including hope, well-being, and life satisfaction, in students with and without cognitive disabilities.

Future Research

In the future, it will be important to evaluate the relationships of self-determination with other positive psychology constructs and the contributions to, singly and combined, more positive adult outcomes and optimal psychological functioning. Furthermore, we believe that research and model development in self-determination will be and should continue to be focused on marginalized populations—populations such as people with disabilities, people who are aging and elderly, people from minority ethnic or socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, and so forth—not due to historic reasons of deficits, but because of the salience and importance of enhanced self-determination to these populations to achieve optimal functioning and outcomes. Finally, our contention is that promoting self-determination should be a major focus of both the educational and the lifelong learning process.

Future Questions

To what degree does self-determination interact with other positive psychological constructs to predict optimal human functioning and well-being?

How does self-determination fit into models of human agentic behavior and other organismic theories of human action?

What interventions enhance personal self-determination?

Acknowledgements

Funding for this research was provided, in part, by Grant PR Award #R324A110177 from the U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Special Education Research. The contents of this report do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and endorsement by the U.S. Federal Government should not be assumed.

Angyal, A. ( 1941 ). Foundations for a science of personality . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Google Scholar

Google Preview

Brandtstädter, J. ( 1998 ). Action perspectives on human development. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Theoretical models of human development: Vol. 1, Handbook of child psychology (5th ed., pp. 807–863). New York: Wiley.

Bruzzese, J. , Idalski Carcone, A. , Lam, P. , Ellis, D. A. , & Naar-King, S. ( 2014 ). Adherence to asthma medication regimens in urban African American adolescents: Application of self-determination theory.   Health Psychology , 33 (5), 461–464. doi:10.1037/a0033510 10.1037/a0033510

Chapman, M. ( 1984 ). Intentional action as a paradigm for developmental psychology: A symposium.   ` , 27 (3–4), 113–144. doi:10.1159/000272908 10.1159/000272908

Chen, C. , & Bozeman, B. ( 2013 ). Understanding public and nonprofit managers’ motivation through the lens of self-determination theory.   Public Management Review , 15 (4), 584–607. doi:10.1080/14719037.2012.698853 10.1080/14719037.2012.698853

Curran, T. , Hill, A. P. , & Niemiec, C. P. ( 2013 ). A conditional process model of children’s behavioral engagement and behavioral disaffection in sport based on self-determination theory.   Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology , 35 (1), 30–43.

deCharms, R. ( 1968 ). Personal Causation: The Internal Affective Determinants of Behavior . Academic Press, New York.

Deci, E. L. ( 2004 ). Promoting intrinsic motivation and self-determination in people with mental retardation. In H. Switzky , L. Hickson , R. Schalock , & M. L. Wehmeyer , (Eds.), Personality and motivational systems in mental retardation: Vol. 28, International review of research in mental retardation (pp. 1–31). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. ( 1985 a). The General Causality Orientations Scale: Self-determination in personality.   Journal of Research in Personality , 19 (2), 109–134. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6 10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6

Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. ( 1985 b). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior . New York: Plenum Press. doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7 10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7

Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. ( 2000 ). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry , 11 , 227–268. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. ( 2002 ). Handbook of self-determination research . Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. ( 2012 a). Self-determination theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange , A. W. Kruglanski , & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 416–437). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781446249215.n21 10.4135/9781446249215.n21

Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. ( 2012 b). Motivation, personality, and development within embedded social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 85–110). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195399820.013.0006 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195399820.013.0006

Deci, E. L. , & Vansteenkiste, M. ( 2004 ). Self-determination theory and basic need satisfaction: Understanding human development in positive psychology.   Ricerche di Psichologia , 27 , 17–34.

Deci, E. L. , Koestner, R. , & Ryan, R. M. ( 1999 ). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation.   Psychological Bulletin , 125 (6), 627–668. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627 10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627

Gourlan, M. , Sarrazin, P. , & Trouilloud, D. ( 2013 ). Motivational interviewing as a way to promote physical activity in obese adolescents: A randomised-controlled trial using self-determination theory as an explanatory framework.   Psychology & Health , 28 (11), 1265–1286. doi:10.1080/08870446.2013.800518 10.1080/08870446.2013.800518

Gove, P. B. (Ed.). ( 1967 ). Webster’s third new international dictionary of the English language, unabridged . Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.

Harter, S. ( 1999 ). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective . New York: Guilford.

Hawley, P. H. ( 1999 ). The ontogenesis of social dominance: A strategy-based evolutionary perspective.   Developmental Review , 19 , 91–132. doi:10.1006/drev.1998.0470 10.1006/drev.1998.0470

Hawley, P. H. , & Little, T. D. ( 2002 ). Evolutionary and developmental perspectives on the agentic self. In D. Cervone & W. Mischel (Eds.), Advances in personality science . New York: Guilford.

Kemerling, G. (2000– 2001 ). John Locke . Philosophy pages . Retrieved on December 29, 2014, from http://www.philosophypages.com/locke/g0.htm

Little, T. D. ( 1998 ). Sociocultural influences on the development of children’s action-control beliefs. In J. Heckhausen & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Motivation and Self-Regulation across the life span (pp. 281–315). New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511527869.013 10.1017/CBO9780511527869.013

Little, T. D. , Hawley, P. H. , Henrich, C. C. , & Marsland, K. ( 2002 ). Three views of the agentic self: A developmental synthesis. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-Determination research (pp. 389–404). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

Little, T. D. , Lopez, D. F. , & Wanner, B. ( 2001 ). Children’s action-control behaviors (coping): A longitudinal validation of the behavioral inventory of strategic control.   Anxiety, Stress, and Coping , 14 , 315–336. doi:10.1080/10615800108248360 10.1080/10615800108248360

Little, T. D. , Snyder, C. R. , & Wehmeyer, M. ( 2006 ). The agentic self: On the nature and origins of personal agency across the lifespan. In D. K. Mroczek & T. D. Little (Eds.), Handbook of personality development (pp. 61–80). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.

Liu, W. , Wang, C. , Kee, Y. , Koh, C. , Lim, B. , & Chua, L. ( 2014 ). College students’ motivation and learning strategies profiles and academic achievement: a self-determination theory approach.   Educational Psychology , 34 (3), 338–353. doi:10.1080/01443410.2013.785067 10.1080/01443410.2013.785067

Locke, J. (1690). An essay concerning human understanding . Retrieved on December 29, 2014, from http://www.philosophypages.com/locke/g0.htm doi:10.1093/oseo/instance.00018020 10.1093/oseo/instance.00018020

Oliver, E. J. , Markland, D. , & Hardy, J. ( 2010 ). Interpretation of self-talk and post-lecture affective states of higher education students: A self-determination theory perspective.   British Journal of Educational Psychology , 80 (2), 307–323. doi:10.1348/000709909X477215 10.1348/000709909X477215

Ryan, R. M. ( 1995 ). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes.   Journal of Personality , 63 , 397–427. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1995.tb00501.x 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1995.tb00501.x

Ryan, R. M. , & Deci, E. L. ( 2000 a). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.   American Psychologist , 55 , 68–78. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Ryan, R. M. , & Deci, E. L. ( 2000 b). The darker and brighter sides of human existence: Basic psychological needs as a unifying concept. Psychological Inquiry , 11 , 319–338. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_03 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_03

Ryan, R. M. , & Deci, E. L. ( 2002 ). An overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-Determination research (pp. 3–36). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

Ryan, R. M. , Bernstein, J. H. , & Brown, K. W. ( 2010 ). Weekends, work, and well-being: Psychological need satisfactions and day of the week effects on mood, vitality, and physical symptoms.   Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology , 29 , 95–122. doi:10.1521/jscp.2010.29.1.95 10.1521/jscp.2010.29.1.95

Sheldon, K. M. , Ryan, R. M. , Deci, E. L. , & Kasser, T. ( 2004 ). The independent effects of goal contents and motives on well-being: It’s both what you pursue and why you pursue it.   Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 30 , 475–486. doi:10.1177/0146167203261883 10.1177/0146167203261883

Shogren, K. A. , & Wehmeyer, M. L. ( 2015 ). Examining the development of self-Determination. An unpublished grant proposal.

Shogren, K. A. , Lopez, S. J. , Wehmeyer, M. L. , Little, T. D. , & Pressgrove, C. L. ( 2006 ). The role of positive psychology constructs in predicting life satisfaction in adolescents with and without cognitive disabilities: An exploratory study.   Journal of Positive Psychology , 1 , 37–52. doi:10.1080/17439760500373174 10.1080/17439760500373174

Shogren, K. A. , Wehmeyer, M. L. , Palmer, S. B. , Forber-Pratt, A. , Little, T. , & Lopez, S. ( 2015 ). Causal agency theory: Reconceptualizing a functional model of self-determination.   Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities , 50 (3), 251–263.

Shogren, K. A. , Wehmeyer, M. L. , Palmer, S. B. , Rifenbark, G. , & Little, T. ( 2015 ). Relationships between self-determination and postschool outcomes for youth with disabilities.   Journal of Special Education , 48 (4), 256–267. doi:10.1177/0022466913489733 10.1177/0022466913489733

Shogren, K. , Palmer, S. , Wehmeyer, M. L. , Williams-Diehm, K. , & Little, T. ( 2012 ). Effect of intervention with the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction on access and goal attainment.   Remedial and Special Education , 33 (5), 320–330. doi:10.1177/0741932511410072 10.1177/0741932511410072

Skinner, E. A. ( 1995 ). Perceived control, motivation, and coping . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781483327198 10.4135/9781483327198

Skinner, E. A. ( 1996 ). A guide to constructs of control.   Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 71 (3), 549–570. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.549 10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.549

Skinner, E. A. , & Edge, K. ( 2002 ). Self-determination, coping, and development. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-Determination research (pp. 297–338). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

VandenBos, G. R. (Ed.). ( 2007 ). APA dictionary of psychology . Washington, DC: APA.

Vanlede, M. , Little, T. D. , & Card, N. A. ( 2006 ). Action-control beliefs and behaviors as predictors of change in adjustment across the transition to middle school.   Anxiety, Stress, and Coping , 19 , 111–127. doi:10.1080/10615800600632896 10.1080/10615800600632896

Vansteenkiste, M. , & Ryan, R. M. ( 2013 ). On psychological growth and vulnerability: Basic psychological need satisfaction and need frustration as a unifying principle.   Journal of Psychotherapy Integration , 23 (3), 263–280. doi: 10.1037/a0032359. doi:10.1037/a0032359 10.1037/a0032359

Vansteenkiste, M. , Claes, L. , Soenens, B. , & Verstuyf, J. ( 2013 ). Motivational dynamics among eating-disordered patients with and without nonsuicidal self-injury: A self-determination theory approach.   European Eating Disorders Review , 21 (3), 209–214. doi:10.1002/erv.2215 10.1002/erv.2215

Vansteenkiste, M. , Niemiec, C. , & Soenens, B. ( 2012 ). The development of the five mini-theories of self-determination theory: An historical overview, emerging trends, and future directions. In T. Urdan & S. Karabenick (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: vol. 16, The decade ahead . London, UK: Emerald Publishing.

Wehmeyer, M. L. , Palmer, S. B. , Agran, M. , Mithaug, D. E. , & Martin, J. ( 2000 ). Teaching students to become causal agents in their lives: The self-determining learning model of instruction.   Exceptional Children , 66 , 439–453.

Wehmeyer, M. L. , Palmer, S. , Shogren, K. , Williams-Diehm, K. , & Soukup, J. ( 2012 ). Establishing a causal relationship between interventions to promote self-determination and enhanced student self-determination.   Journal of Special Education , 46 (4), 195–210. doi:10.1177/0022466910392377 10.1177/0022466910392377

Wehmeyer, M. L. , Shogren, K. , Palmer, S. , Williams-Diehm, K. , Little, T. , & Boulton, A. ( 2012 ). The impact of the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction on student self-determination.   Exceptional Children , 78 (2), 135–153.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

April 27, 2024

Similar patterns of our unique growth

Self-Determination Theory: Evaluation, comparisons and future research

Theories store and condense knowledge, offer practical applications and guide research (Shoemaker et al., 2004). To study individual differences in motivation therefore requires knowledge of motivation theories. This essay will provide a short introduction to the Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2017) and critically reflect its strength and weaknesses.

Self-Determination Theory

The Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is a broad human motivation and personality theory, employing an organismic meta-theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000). It is primarily concerned with how social and environmental conditions can satisfy their basic psychological needs (competence, relatedness, autonomy) and therefore promote or hinder their thriving and well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2017). SDT proposes that humans are inherently self-motivated, eager to learn, and willing to put in the effort to extend themselves. However, these tendencies need support by (social) contexts, else humans turn to apathy and irresponsibility (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

SDT comprises six mini theories, each covering a different aspect of motivation. This essay will focus on one of these theories, Organismic Integration Theory .

An introduction to Self-Determination Theory

Motivation is the process that gives both energy and direction to people’s behaviour (Ryan & Deci, 2017). Energy refers to the (relative) strength and persistence of the behaviour, while direction implies the behaviour is driven towards a goal by intention (Reeve, 2009). A behaviour that lacks either strength or direction (e.g., unintentionally closing the eyes when sneezing) does not fall under motivation.

SDT proposes two basic types of motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. A be- haviour is intrinsically motivated if it is performed “for its own sake”, because the action it- self is perceived as interesting or enjoyable. An extrinsically motivated behaviour on the other hand is performed to achieve an outome that is separable from the action itself, e.g. to earn a reward or avoid punishment (Ryan & Deci, 2000, 2017). Research provided evidence that intrinsic motivation is associated with more positive outcomes (e.g., performance or well-being) than extrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2008).

According to Organismic Integration Theory, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are not dichotomous. Instead, extrinsic motivation is divided into four subtypes (called regulatory styles, see Fig. 1). These subtypes differ in their extent of internalization , the integration of external regulation into one’s self, and their perceived locus of causality (if the behaviour is perceived as internally or externally caused). The more a behaviour is internalized, the less controlled it is perceived and the more autonomous it becomes (Ryan & Deci, 2000, 2020).

Internalization can be facilitated by the satisfaction of the three basic psychological need, that is, experiences of relatedness, competence and autonomy. However, the opposite is also true: an environment that does not support basic need satisfaction can quickly turn intrinsic motivation into extrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). It is also suggested that extrinsic re- wards, such as monetary incentives, can undermine and “crowd out” intrinsic motivation (Frey & Jegen, 2001).

A critical reflection of Self-Determination Theory

Shoemaker et al. (2004) name 10 evaluation criteria for social sciences theories: testability, falsifiability, parsimony, explanatory power, predictive power, scope, cumulative nature, de- gree of formal development, and heuristic value.

The Self-Determination Theory is a very broad theory and has been applied to various topics such as education (e.g., Katz et al., 2014), sports (e.g., Hagger & Chatzisarantis, 2007), and health care (e.g., Li et al., 2020). Since SDT can be used to explain human behaviour in nearly every situation, it has a very large scope . The large amount of research that has been sparked by it (see Ryan & Deci, 2019) also indicates its high heuristic value . Research based on SDT is supported by the large amount of measurements for SDT constructs that were de- veloped, such as the Revised Sport Motivation Scale (Pelletier et al., 2013), the Intrinsic Mo- tivation Inventory (Tsigilis & Theodosiou, 2003), or the Self-Regulation Questionnaires for various contexts, e.g. health behaviour (Levesque et al., 2007). These instruments also con- tribute to the testability of SDT: key variables of the theory can be measured using validated and well-tried questionnaires.

The large scope of SDT however comes with a drawback: low parsimony . In its decades of development (see Ryan & Deci, 2019), the SDT framework was constantly extended and the six mini theories (Ryan & Deci, 2017) emerged, resulting in a quite complex theory.

While the main points of the theory can be summarized quickly, it takes some time and effort to grasp all its aspects and the connections between the mini theories. The broad framework also leads to only moderate falsifiability . It is hard to disprove the whole theory with evidence due to its complexity and the various constructs included in the framework. For example, hu- man behaviour can be influenced by multiple regulations at the same time (Ryan & Deci, 2020), which makes it hard to pin-point the association between regulatory styles and well- being that is proposed by Organismic Integration Theory.

The cumulative nature of SDT is very high, as it has generated a lot of research and the theory has grown constantly since its inception in 1980 (Ryan & Deci, 2019). The theory has also been discussed in regards to neuopsychological correlates and connections to other theories, e.g. the Big Five personality traits (Ryan et al., 2019). Overall, it has been shown that the regulatory styles follow a simplex-like pattern, where regulatory styles close to each other show a higher correlation than those farther away (Ryan & Connell, 1989), which lends credibility to the structure displayed in Figure 1 above. There is also a lot of evidence that in- trinsic motivation as well as highly internalized forms of extrinsic motivation are associated with more positive outcomes, compared to rather controlled regulatory styles (e.g., Deci & Ryan, 2008). However, there are also reviews pointing to inconsistencies in research results of SDT in certain topics, e.g. physical activity and exercise (Teixeira et al., 2012).

SDT has a moderate degree of formal development . While it is an exhaustive theory integrating different aspects of human motivation, there are no mathematical models and pre- cise path diagrams that allow the formulation of precise hypotheses. It is also not presented at a “finished” theory, as the authors emphasize its organic growth (Ryan et al., 2019).

Given how broad the framework of SDT is, its predictions are not precise, which leads to low predictive power : The theory makes no assumptions about the strength of associations between e.g. intrinsic motivation and well-being. On the other hand, it has a high explanatory power by taking both internal (e.g., motives and goals) and external (social relationships, context) variables into account when explaining human motivation and behaviour.

In summary, it can be stated that the main strengths of Self-Determination Theory are the range of topics it can be applied to and a large amount of research it has generated in the last decades. Its main weaknesses are its complexity and low predictive power.

A look ahead: Future directions in Self-Determination Theory research

“Theory building is an ongoing process. It doesn’t come to an end” (Shoemaker et al., 2004, p. 2). Since its inception, Self-Determination Theory constantly grew, has been revisited and partitioned into six mini theories. However, there is still much that remains to be done.

The Self-Determination Theory is very broad and covers a lot of aspects of human motivation and behaviour. This, in turn, leaves the theory very complex: for example, the book by Ryan and Deci (2017) on SDT comprises over 700 pages. The construction of pathway models, similar to the one Sheldon and Elliot (1999) present for their Self-Concordance Model, might help make the theory more concise and easier to grasp. This would also offer the opportunity to increase falsifiability by formulating more mathematical relationships between the different constructs which can then be empirically tested.

Most of research on SDT until today took place on a psychological level (Reeve & Lee, 2019). Utilizing research methods of neuroscience might offer a new perspective on SDT and help researchers understand motivational constructs more thoroughly. Methods like EEG or fMRI may be especially useful in uncovering non-conscious processes (which cannot be assessed by traditional questionnaires), as well as measuring motivation in real time, not in retrospect (Reeve & Lee, 2019). If motivational processes can be tracked to neural correlates, this might also help understanding individual differences in motivation.

An aspect of SDT that needs more clarification is the process of internalization. Internalization is the process of integrating a goal or regulation into one’s self, leading to more autonomous motivation. It depends on the satisfaction of the three basic needs. However, it is not clear how this process works: Is it conscious or unconscious? Is it something that just “happens”, or can a human proactively drive it forward? How long does it take to go through the regulatory styles from extrinsic to integrated regulation? Does this depend on the nature of the goal that is being internalized? And is it possible to skip regulatory styles? Answering these questions would also indicate opportunities to design training programs, e.g. for teachers or sports coaches, to help their students attain the more autonomous motivation and benefit from its positive effects.

Related posts:

• Self-Regulation: “I don’t want to do it… But I have to”
• Did your parents really mess you up?
• Assessment of Individual Differences by the Police – Should ethnicity weigh in?
• Individual Differences perspective on Retirement

Published in Blog posts and Self-Determination Theory

Be First to Comment

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

15 Self-Determination Examples For Writing Your Own Story

Self-determination is the ability to act according to your values, goals, and choices. It is an important concept in psychology and well-being, as it influences your motivation, behavior, and happiness. Self-determination theory, proposed by Ryan and Deci, suggests that people have three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. When these needs are met, people feel more self-determined and intrinsically motivated to pursue their interests and growth.

Sanju Pradeepa

You know that feeling when you realize you’ve been blindly following the script that society has written for you? The nagging sense that there must be more to life than chasing promotions, accumulating possessions, and meeting expectations that aren’t even your own? Well, wake up and smell the fair-trade coffee! There are people out there rebelling against the status quo and forging their own paths. In this article, you’ll meet three individuals who threw out the rule book and pursued their dreams on their terms.

Get ready to be inspired as you dive into the stories of a nomadic entrepreneur, an activist artist, and a philanthropic farmer—all who broke from convention to lead self-determined lives rich in meaning, impact, and adventure. The moral of their stories? Don’t be afraid to go against the grain. Happiness and purpose await those brave enough to cut their trail. So what are you waiting for? Start blazing! as in here we are talking about both self-determination examples and how it apply when it comes to reality.

Table of Contents

What is self-determination.

It means having the freedom and power to make your own choices and shape your future. When you pursue your goals and dreams despite obstacles or naysayers, that’s self-determination in action!

Some real-life examples of self-determination include:

• Walt Disney was fired from a newspaper for “lacking imagination” and had many of his early businesses fail, but he persevered and built the Disney empire.
• J.K. Rowling’s first Harry Potter book was rejected by 12 publishers before being accepted. Her self-belief and determination made the series a reality.
• As a child, Jim Carrey wrote himself a check for $10 million for “acting services rendered” and carried it in his wallet for years until he achieved success. His unstoppable drive and vision propelled him forward.
• Helen Keller was the first deaf and blind person to earn a Bachelor of Arts degree, overcoming immense barriers through her resolve and perseverance.
• Nelson Mandela spent 27 years in prison before becoming South Africa’s first black president and dismantling apartheid. His steadfast courage and conviction changed history.

The History of the Self-Determination Movement

The self-determination movement has a long and inspiring history. Going back to the 18th century, visionaries championed the idea that all people have a fundamental right to make their own choices and shape their own destinies.

In the 1960s, disability rights activists began demanding more self-determination, control, and choice over their own lives. This led to deinstitutionalization, the move to provide community-based services rather than institutionalization. The Independent Living Movement was born, fighting for disabled individuals’ civil rights and ability to live independently.

In the 1970s and 1980s, self-advocates emerged, speaking up and self-advocating for their right to direct their own services and supports. Parent advocates also began advocating for more choice and control over their children’s services.

Read more – Self-determination From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 1990s: A Turning Point

The 1990s were a pivotal time. Several US federal laws affirm the rights of individuals with disabilities to direct their own services, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992. Medicaid also approved the self-direction of services.

The new millennium brought greater self-determination and consumer direction in health care, education, housing, and employment. People worldwide are demanding more autonomy and control over their lives.

The self-determination movement has empowered so many to pursue their dreams and shape their own destiny. Its inspiring history can motivate all of us to advocate for the rights and well-being of others. The future is bright as we forge our own paths in life.

Why is Determination Important: A Key to Achieve Your Goals

Self-determination examples.

Here are some examples of self-determination in different contexts:

1. Advocating for Your Rights

You have rights, and you deserve to stand up for them! Don’t let anyone make you feel like you don’t matter or that your voice doesn’t count.

Speak up and advocate for yourself whenever you face injustice or feel you’ve been wronged. Politely but firmly tell the person that their actions were unacceptable and that you expect to be treated with dignity and respect . You may also want to document specific instances of unfair treatment in case you need to report the issue to HR or a manager.

Don’t be afraid to ask for reasonable accommodations at work or school if you have a disability or medical issue. Your needs are valid and important. Explain your situation professionally and provide any required documentation. Most institutions aim to provide inclusive environments, so don’t feel like you’re causing trouble.

If you witness discrimination against others, say something. Silence implies acceptance of unfair behavior. Support colleagues and peers who are facing adversity. Sign petitions for good causes you believe in. Call or write to political representatives about issues that matter to you. One person can make a difference!

Every voice has power. Use yours to stand up for justice, equality, and human rights. Channel your passion into positive change. The world needs more self-advocates willing to speak truth to power. Be that voice of courage, and inspire others through your actions. Together, we can create a society that values all people.

2. Choosing Where and How You Live

Choosing where you live and how you set up your living space is one of the most fundamental ways to express your independence. When you have the freedom to decide on your own dwelling, the possibilities are endless!

Find Your Dream home.

Do you long to live in a tiny house, an RV, or a converted school bus? Maybe a houseboat or yurt is more your style. Don’t feel limited to traditional houses and apartments. Find what energizes and inspires you! Search for places that spark your creativity and sense of adventure.

Decorate Freely

Now is your chance to craft rooms and spaces that truly reflect your vibrant personality 4. Paint the walls your favorite bright colors, fill the place with beloved collections, hang unusual art, or add fun furnishings. Don’t hold back; go bold with your decorating choices! An eclectic, cozy space you can call your own will lift your mood and fuel your determination.

Set Your Own schedule.

Living independently means organizing your time as you see fit. Keep the hours that energize you, wake up when you want, and engage in hobbies and social activities that fulfill you. Maybe you’re most productive late at night or early in the morning. Follow your natural rhythms instead of society’s rules. Achieve the perfect work-life balance that leaves you feeling cheerful and motivated.

Forging your own path in life begins with choosing how and where you live. Find a home that sparks joy, decorate in a way that inspires you, and set a schedule that maximizes your happiness and productivity. Make your space a reflection of your free spirit and zest for life! Independence never felt so exhilarating.

3. Selecting Support Services That Meet Your Needs

Choosing services and supports that genuinely meet your needs is key to living a self-determined life. The options available today are vast, so do some research on what’s out there. Talk to others in similar situations about what has and hasn’t worked for them.

Once you have an idea of the possibilities, think about what really matters to you. Do you value maximum independence or the security of more assistance? Are low costs a high priority, or is quality most important? Consider your goal s, abilities, and limitations. You know yourself best, so listen to your instincts!

When you find services that spark your interest, schedule visits to check them out in person. Meet the staff, ask lots of questions, and pay attention to how you feel about the place. An empowering support system will encourage your self-sufficiency while also providing help when you need it. They’ll treat you with dignity and respect, valuing your opinions and choices.

Don’t settle for anything less than an ideal fit. The services you choose will play a huge role in your quality of life, so take your time exploring all options thoroughly. When you find the right match, you’ll gain peace of mind knowing trusted help is there to assist you on your journey to greater independence and fulfillment. Staying determined in your search will lead you to the supportive communities and empowering services that suit you best!

Keep your head high. Believe in yourself and your ability to shape a life of meaning on your own terms. With self-confidence, creativity, and the right kind of help, you can achieve amazing things. Stay focused on your dreams and never stop discovering ways to make them come true!

4. Making Your Own Healthcare Decisions

You have the power to make your own healthcare decisions. Don’t rely on doctors, parents, or partners to decide what’s right for you. Take charge of your health!

Doing Your Own Research

The internet puts a world of health information at your fingertips. Look into your symptoms or conditions and possible treatments. Read reviews from others in your situation. The more you know, the more confident you’ll feel in taking the lead in your care.

Asking Questions

Don’t be afraid to ask your doctor lots of questions. If you don’t understand something, speak up! Doctors are there to inform you so you can make the best choice for your needs. Come prepared with a list of questions and take notes on the answers.

Exploring All Options

Discuss all available treatment options with your doctor, not just the most common ones. Get second opinions from other doctors if needed. Look into alternative or holistic therapies in addition to traditional medicine. The path that’s right for you may not always be the most mainstream one.

Trusting Your Instincts

You know your body and health situation better than anyone else. Go with what feels right to you, not what others pressure you into. If something doesn’t seem quite right, say so. Don’t proceed with any treatment you’re not fully comfortable with.

Staying Flexible

Your health needs may change over time. Be open to re-evaluating your options and the course of your care. The choices you make today don’t have to be set in stone. You have the freedom to adjust as needed to suit your wellbeing.

Take charge of your health; you’ve got this! Do your research, ask questions, explore your options fully, and trust your instincts. Your self-determination and flexibility will serve you well. Stay empowered!

5. Pursuing Meaningful Employment

Pursuing work you find meaningful and impactful is one of the most rewarding ways to gain self-determination. When you do work that motivates and inspires you, you’ll find an inner drive and passion that propel you forward.

Several options to consider for meaningful work include:

• Finding a job that contributes to the greater good Look for work at a non-profit organization, school, or healthcare facility. Roles like teaching, nursing, and social services allow you to make a positive difference in people’s lives every day.
• Turning a hobby or interest into a business If you have a skill or talent you’re passionate about, consider ways to monetize it. Give guitar lessons, sell handcrafted goods, or offer tutoring in a subject you love. Pouring yourself into work you genuinely care about is tremendously fulfilling.
• Volunteering your time for a good cause Donate your skills and talents to an organization you support. Help build homes for Habitat for Humanity, walk dogs at your local animal shelter, and tutor underprivileged children. Helping others in need provides a sense of purpose and meaning.
• Traveling to gain new perspectives. Take a job teaching English abroad, join the Peace Corps, or volunteer with an international aid organization. Immersing yourself in different cultures expands your mind and allows you to make a valuable contribution. You’ll return home with a fresh outlook and renewed motivation.

When you pursue work that ignites your passion and desire to help others, you’ll gain independence and feel empowered to shape your own destiny. Make the choice to follow a path that inspires your creativity , fuels your motivation, and contributes value to the world. Meaningful work is the key to unlocking your full potential for self-determination.

6. Planning Your Own Day-to-Day Activities

Planning your own day is the ultimate act of self-determination. When you take control of how you spend each day, you open yourself up to new opportunities and adventures.

Make a Flexible schedule.

Create a loose schedule for yourself each day that includes time for work or school as well as leisure activities. Pencil in blocks of time for things like exercising, socializing, pursuing hobbies, and relaxing. Leave some open space for spontaneity! Having structure will give you a sense of purpose , but flexibility is key.

Within your schedule, focus on including activities that energize and inspire you. Do you love reading, painting, or playing an instrument? Make time for your passions each day. Try waking up a bit earlier to watch the sunrise or go for a morning walk. Intentionally beginning your day will motivate you to continue making self-determined choices throughout the day.

Explore Your interests.

Now that you have more control over your time, dive into learning about topics that fascinate you. Have you always wanted to learn how to code or speak Italian? Find interactive websites, apps, podcasts, and online courses to start developing a new skill. Read books on subjects that motivate and excite you. Let your curiosity guide you to discover more about yourself and the world around you.

Reflect on Your choices.

At the end of each day, reflect on the choices you made and how they impacted your mood and productivity. Did you feel inspired and energized or bored and restless? Make note of what worked and didn’t work to build on your self-determination skills. With regular practice, planning fulfilling days and making self-directed choices will become second nature. You’ll find new confidence in your ability to shape life into what you want it to be!

7. Develop an Internal Locus of control.

Developing an internal locus of control is all about believing in your ability to influence the events in your life. When you have an internal locus of control, you feel empowered and motivated. You recognize that your own choices and actions shape your destiny.

To strengthen your internal locus of control, start by setting small, achievable goals and following through. Each success, no matter how small, builds your confidence in your ability to steer your course. Make decisions, both big and small, and own them. Don’t blame outside forces if things don’t go as planned; look for the lessons and how you can grow from them.

Surround yourself with a strong support system of people who share your growth mindset. Their positive influence can help drown out the voices of the naysayers and empower you to forge ahead. When self-doubt creeps in, turn to your cheerleaders to help build you back up.

Also, avoid language that implies you are not in control, like “I have to do this” or “I can’t”. Replace it with empowering phrases such as “I choose to do this” or “I will find a way”. Your words have power, so wield them to strengthen your internal resolve.

Every day, look for opportunities to make choices that align with your values and priorities. Start with something small, like choosing a healthy lunch option or committing to a regular gym schedule. Then build up to bigger life decisions. The more you practice, the more second-nature it will become.

With time and conscious effort, you can transform your mindset to believe that you are the captain of your fate. Developing an internal locus of control is a journey, not a destination. But with each step you take, you are building a life on your terms. Stay focused on progress, not perfection, and never stop learning and growing. You’ve got this! Success is yours to shape.

8. Accept Responsibility for Your choices.

When it comes to self-determination, accepting responsibility for your choices is key. You alone are in control of your destiny, my friend! Every decision you make shapes your journey. Rather than blame external forces, embrace your power to choose and commit to owning the outcomes.

Once you acknowledge that you are ultimately responsible for your situation, you gain the freedom to make changes. No longer can you make excuses or shift blame. You recognize that you alone can alter your course through the choices you make each and every day.

Every choice, no matter how small it seems, matters. Choose to start your day with exercise or hit the snooze button. Choose a salad or burger for lunch. Call a friend or watch TV after work? Our choices accumulate like compound interest, determining our direction and destination over time.

Rather than feeling overwhelmed by responsibility, feel empowered! You have the power to build the life you want through your choices and actions. Stay focused on progress, not perfection. Celebrate your wins, big and small, and learn from your mistakes. With each choice, ask yourself, “Is this getting me closer to where I want to be?” If not, choose again.

When you accept responsibility for your situation and choices, you open the door to possibility and progress. You alone hold the key to your happiness and success. Unlock your potential by choosing wisely and following your heart’s true path. The journey is yours to shape!

9. Pursue Your Passions

Pursuing your passions is one of the most fulfilling ways to live a self-determined life. When you follow your interests and dreams, life becomes an exciting journey of discovery.

Find Your spark.

What lights you up inside? What topics could you talk about for hours? Your passions are the activities that energize and inspire you. Maybe you’ve loved art since you were a child, or you geek out learning about science and technology. Don’t dismiss your passions as unimportant; they are clues to your purpose and potential.

Nurture Your passions.

Once you’ve identified your sparks, nurture them through learning and action. Read books on the subjects, take a class, join an online community, or start a project. As you immerse yourself, your knowledge and skills will grow, fueling your motivation. When you pursue your passions, life’s challenges and setbacks won’t derail you because your internal drive is so strong.

Share Your passions.

Don’t keep the joy of your passions to yourself; share them with others. Start a blog, podcast, or YouTube channel. Teach a skill-sharing class in your local community. Look for ways to spread your enthusiasm, even in small ways. As you share your passions, you’ll inspire others and gain valuable experience. You may even find new opportunities and connections that lead you down an unexpected and fulfilling, self-determined path.

Pursuing your passions requires courage and commitment, but it leads to a life of purpose and meaning. Don’t settle for what others expect of you. Choose to follow your own interests and dreams instead. Take that first step today to nurture your sparks and share your passions with the world. A self-determined life awaits!

How to Find Your Passion Using 4 Easy Steps

10. develop self-confidence through practice and preparation..

Developing self-confidence requires practice and preparation. The more you step out of your comfort zone , the more your confidence will grow. Here are a few ways to strengthen your self-confidence through action:

Get comfortable with discomfort. Do one thing each day that makes you slightly uncomfortable but that you know you can handle. Maybe it’s starting a conversation with a stranger, asking a question in a meeting at work, or joining a recreational sports league. Pushing your limits in small ways builds courage and self-belief over time.

Prepare and practice. Never wing it. Practice your presentations, speeches, pitches, etc. out loud, ideally in front of a mirror or in front of friends and family. Hearing yourself speak the words will make you more comfortable with the material and help you avoid “ums” and awkward pauses. Feeling well-prepared boosts your self-confidence.

Start small and build up. Don’t go from 0 to 60 in one day. Set small, achievable goals and progressively make them more challenging. If public speaking scares you, start by speaking up more in meetings, then do a 2-minute speech at Toastmasters, work your way up to 5 minutes, and so on. Celebrate each small win along the way. Success builds success.

Do your research. Know your material inside and out. If you have to give a work presentation or speech, learn as much as possible about the topic. The more you know, the more confident you’ll feel while speaking. You’ll sound more confident when answering questions, too. Knowledge truly is power.

Why is Self-Confidence Important to Success: (13 Reasons)

11. stand up for what you believe in..

Standing up for what you believe in takes courage, but it is so important for following your own path in life. When you see injustice or something that goes against your values, speak up! Make your voice heard. Don’t sit by silently while others make decisions you disagree with.

Find your inner strength and confidence to stand up for yourself and others. You have a unique perspective to share with the world. Rally others to support a common cause or sign a petition to create change. Write to government officials or start a social media campaign to raise awareness about issues that matter to you. Every action makes a difference.

Some examples of people who stood up for their beliefs and made a huge impact include:

• Martin Luther King Jr. organized nonviolent protests to fight for civil rights and an end to racial segregation and discrimination. He spoke up in the face of adversity and ultimately lost his life for the cause of justice and equality.
• Greta Thunberg, the teen activist fighting for action on climate change She started a grassroots movement that has spread worldwide, inspiring young and old alike to demand a sustainable future for our planet. Her brave actions prove that one voice can make a difference.

Standing up for your beliefs may not always be easy, but it will help you stay true to yourself. Have the courage of your convictions and speak up against injustice. Make your voice heard; it could change the world! The path to self-determination starts with action. Be bold and stand up for what you believe in.

Courage and Determination: What Takes to Achieve Your Goals

Real-life examples of self-determination.

When you pursue your goals and dreams despite obstacles or naysayers, that’s self-determination in action! Keep your eyes on the prize, believe in yourself, and never give up. Success is rarely achieved overnight, but with determination and grit, you can achieve amazing things. Stay focused on your vision and keep putting one foot in front of the other. You’ve got this!

1. The Life of Helen Keller: Overcoming Disability Through Perseverance

Helen Keller was the first deaf and blind person to earn a bachelor’s degree, and her story serves as an inspiration to anyone facing adversity. Despite losing her sight and hearing at 19 months old, Helen persevered against immense challenges through her education.

At age 7, Helen met her lifelong teacher and friend, Anne Sullivan. Anne taught Helen to communicate using sign language, braille, and later speech. Through Anne’s patience and devotion, Helen learned to read, write, and speak, opening up a whole new world of knowledge and independence.

In 1900, Helen became the first deaf and blind person to earn a bachelor’s degree, graduating from Radcliffe College. This monumental achievement demonstrated Helen’s relentless determination to overcome her disabilities. She went on to become a prolific author, writing a dozen books and hundreds of essays advocating for social justice.

Helen spent her lifetime championing the rights of those with disabilities. She lobbied for workers’ compensation, aid for the blind, and suffrage for women. Her tireless activism and spirit of perseverance in the face of adversity made her an international icon.

Despite the immense challenges of her disabilities, Helen Keller lived an extraordinary life as an author, speaker, and activist. Her story reminds us that through perseverance and determination, we can accomplish incredible feats, even against the greatest of odds. She proved that disability does not define destiny, and with passion and hard work, we can shape our lives into whatever we set our minds to.

2. How Muhammad Ali Refused Military Service During Vietnam

Muhammad Ali is remembered as one of the greatest boxers of all time, but he was also an influential civil rights leader. One of his most courageous acts of self-determination came in 1967, when he refused military service during the Vietnam War.

As America became more involved in the war, the government began drafting young men into military service. When Ali was called up, he refused to go, saying, “I’ve got no quarrel with them, Viet Cong.” He was stripped of his boxing title and sentenced to five years in prison for draft evasion.

Ali stood firm in his beliefs, appealing his case to the Supreme Court. In a unanimous decision, the court overturned his conviction, upholding his conscientious objection to a war he saw as unjust. Ali’s brave stand came at great personal cost, but it helped cement his status as an icon who fought for justice and equality.

His refusal to be drafted demonstrated tremendous self-determination. He could have easily avoided trouble by going along with the government’s orders, but he chose to follow his conscience instead. Even after being stripped of his title and facing imprisonment, he held fast to his principles.

He proved that exercising self-determination often requires great courage and sacrifice. But by refusing to bend to societal pressures that go against one’s values, a person can stand up for justice and shape the course of history. Through his defiance of an unjust system, Ali inspired millions and advanced the cause of freedom and equality.

His steadfastness showed the power of self-determination and serves as an enduring example of how one person can change the world by staying true to their beliefs. Ali marched to the beat of his drum and altered the rhythm of society as a result.

3. Greta Thunberg and the Rise of Youth Climate Activism

Greta Thunberg has become the face of youth climate activism, inspiring students around the globe to make their voices heard. At just 16 years old, Greta began protesting outside the Swedish parliament, demanding that leaders take action against climate change. Her lone protest soon grew into the global movement called Fridays for the Future.

The Rise of a Movement

Through social media, Greta’s message spread like wildfire. Young people in over 100 countries walked out of school to demand climate justice and a sustainable future for all. Greta’s impassioned speeches at events like the United Nations Climate Action Summit gained worldwide attention and acclaim.

Despite facing criticism and personal attacks, Greta has persevered with positivity and determination. She encourages youth to educate themselves about climate change and take action, however small. Everyone has a role to play in mitigating and adapting to this urgent problem.

An Inspiration to All

Greta’s courage, conviction, and resolve in the face of indifference and opposition have made her a role model for people of all ages. She proves that one voice can make a difference and inspire change. While world leaders debate, youth are raising their voices for urgent climate action. They give us hope that the next generation will not stand by while their future is at stake.

Greta’s message is one of empowerment and equality. She stresses that no one is too small to make a difference in tackling climate change. Greta’s vision of a sustainable future for all aligns with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. Her activism shows how youth can drive progress on issues that will impact them the most.

Greta Thunberg’s stand against climate change inaction proves that self-determination and moral courage can change the world. One young woman with a handmade sign has given rise to a global movement that is determined to forge a path to a greener future. Greta shows us that we all have a role to play to make that vision a reality.

4. J.K. Rowling’s Journey to Publishing the First Harry Potter Novel

J.K. Rowling’s journey to publishing the first Harry Potter novel is a shining example of determination against all odds. As a single mother living on welfare in Edinburgh, Scotland, Rowling first came up with the idea for the Harry Potter series in 1990. She spent the next five years meticulously planning the first book in her spare time while struggling with depression and poverty.

Many Rejections Before Success

Rowling received rejection after rejection from publishers for the first Harry Potter book. She was told that children’s fantasy “didn’t sell.” Despite more than a dozen rejections, her belief in her story never wavered. She refused to give up in the face of failure and adversity.

Finally, in 1995, Bloomsbury Publishing agreed to publish the first book in the series, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. They took a chance on the unknown author and her magical tale. Rowling received an advance of £1,500 for the book, allowing her to finally stop relying on welfare to support herself and her young daughter.

An Unparalleled Success

When published in 1997 in the UK (and 1998 in the US), Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone was met with unparalleled success and acclaim. Readers young and old were enchanted by the story of the boy wizard. The series went on to break sales records around the world, gaining popularity through word-of-mouth and launching a global phenomenon.

Rowling’s extraordinary journey from an unknown single mother on welfare to an internationally renowned author is a testament to following your dreams and never giving up in the face of challenges or naysayers. Through hard work, perseverance, and belief in yourself, you can achieve amazing things. Let Rowling’s story inspire you to pursue your passions and stay determined, no matter what obstacles appear in your path. With self-belief and persistence, you too can achieve your dreams against all odds.

Top 10 Inspirational Stories of Great Personalities

You now have inspiration from real-life stories of people who pursued their dreams against the odds. Armed with determination and grit, they overcame obstacles and naysayers to forge their path. Their self-determination led to happiness and fulfillment, not regret. So what’s stopping you from going after that big dream you’ve always had? The only thing holding you back is you.

Believe in yourself, take that first step, however small, and keep putting one foot in front of the other. Before you know it, you’ll be living a life on your terms, filled with passion and purpose. While it may not happen overnight, stay focused on your vision and never stop learning and growing. You have everything it takes to determine your destiny. Now go out there and make it happen! The world is waiting for people like you to make a difference.

• J.K. Rowling
• Greta Thunberg
• ‘Shoot them for what?’ How Muhammad Ali won his greatest figh t By  DeNeen L. Brown from The Washington Post
• My Story – JKR
• Young climate activists demand action and inspire hope – Climate change impacts everyone but the future belongs to young people. Meet some of the youth activists on the frontline . by UNICEF
• Helen Keller: A Remarkable Life of Perseverance and Inspiration by The Wonder Women Project ; Celebrating Women Together

Let’s boost your self-growth with Believe in Mind.

Interested in self-reflection tips, learning hacks, and knowing ways to calm down your mind? We offer you the best content which you have been looking for.

Follow Me on

You May Like Also

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Introduction: ‘Self-Determination’ and Ideas of Freedom

• First Online: 02 June 2020

Cite this chapter

• Rita Augestad Knudsen 2  

262 Accesses

This chapter introduces the international language of ‘self-determination’ and explains the two ideas of freedom that have fought over this discourse over the last hundred years: the radical idea of freedom and the liberal-conservative idea of freedom. It fleshes out the anatomy of legitimation that connects these two ideas of freedom with international ‘self-determination’ discourse, and anchors the book disciplinarily in intellectual history and international history. This introductory chapter explains the organisation of the book in terms of ‘moments’ from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, and the selection of the specific historical moments of self-determination.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, Oslo, Norway

Rita Augestad Knudsen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rita Augestad Knudsen .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Augestad Knudsen, R. (2020). Introduction: ‘Self-Determination’ and Ideas of Freedom. In: The Fight Over Freedom in 20th- and 21st-Century International Discourse. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46429-5_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46429-5_1

Published : 02 June 2020

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-46428-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-46429-5

eBook Packages : History History (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Challenges to Self-Determination in the Twenty-First Century

What does self-determination mean in the twenty-first century? This Collection explores the connection between the new international economic world order and self-determination, expounds upon the difficulties that climate change poses for peoples who seek self-determination, and proposes a multinational conception of self-determination to replace the traditional understanding of the concept.

The Tragedy and Promise of Self-Determination

The principle of self-determination, like Janus, has two faces: negative and positive. Often understood as enabling the fracture of states into national components, the principle is better seen as facilitating the creation of multinational frameworks that foster toleration and human rights.  

Climate Change and Challenges to Self- Determination: Case Studies from French Polynesia and the Republic of Kiribati

This Essay examines effects of climate change and related phenomena on self-determination through two case studies. The case of French Polynesia highlights effects on people’s right to freely dispose of their natural resources. The case of the Republic of Kiribati demonstrates how a defeatist narrat…

The Multiple Selves of Economic Self-Determination

This Essay contends that dyadic understandings of economic self-determination, formed  in light of  earlier anticolonial struggles, are no longer sufficient. It argues instead for a plural and flexible conception, centered on a broader vision of the economic “self,” that more accurately reflects sourc…

Announcing the Eighth Annual Student Essay Competition

Announcing the ylj academic summer grants program, announcing the editors of volume 134, featured content, lock them™ up: holding transnational corporate human-rights abusers accountable, administrative law at a turning point, law and movements: clinical perspectives.

Determination in Life Essay, Stories, Quotes

To live is to live with a goal. Life without a purpose is like a ship without a rudder or an airplane without a pilot. Every person has a purpose in life, but if you don’t know what it is then you will never reach your destination. However, if you know what your destination is than you are one step closer to achieving it and going down the path of success.

Table of Contents

Short Paragraph Essay on Self Determination In Life

The reason that I believe determination is the key to success in life is because if you have determination than you have a strong passion and strong passion can bring you to great heights. The reason why I say that it is the key to success in life is because determination actually leads to success through hard work and persistence.

Determination as I stated above is the key to success in life and when I say this I mean that if one decides on what they want out of life and then goes out and actually works hard towards achieving their goals than they will be successful.

The main theme in this essay is determination. Determination is important because it allows people to focus on what they want in life and achieve it. However, there are other important themes related to determination. For example, hard work and persistence are both important in order to be successful.

Additionally, having a strong passion for something is necessary in order to be determined enough to achieve it.

In conclusion, determination is an important quality to have in life . However, it is not the only important quality. Hard work, persistence, and passion are all important in order to achieve success.

Determination In Life Story

When Sara was young, she dreamed of becoming a doctor. She was inspired by her grandmother, who had spent her life helping people as a nurse. Sara worked hard in school, studied biology and chemistry, and spent countless hours volunteering at hospitals and clinics.

However, despite her efforts, Sara faced many obstacles. She came from a low-income family and couldn’t afford expensive college tuition. She also struggled with a learning disability that made it difficult for her to excel in standardized tests.

Despite these challenges, Sara was determined to achieve her dream. She applied to many scholarships and grants, and eventually earned a full scholarship to a prestigious medical school.

Even during medical school, Sara faced many challenges. The coursework was difficult, and she often felt overwhelmed and exhausted. But Sara refused to give up. She sought help from tutors and professors, and spent long hours studying in the library.

After many years of hard work, Sara graduated from medical school with honors. She went on to become a successful doctor, helping people every day and making a difference in her community.

Sara’s story is a testament to the power of determination. Despite facing many obstacles, she never gave up on her dreams. She worked hard, sought help when she needed it, and persevered through the challenges. Her determination and hard work paid off, and she achieved her goals.

Determination Quote

• Determination and Motivation Quote : “Motivation gets you going, but determination keeps you going.”
• Determination and Hard Work Quote: “Hard work and determination are the keys to success.”
• Determination and Persistence Quote: “Persistence is the vehicle that drives you to your goals, and determination is the fuel that keeps you going.”
• Determination and Discipline Quote: “Discipline is the bridge between goals and accomplishment, and determination is the engine that powers it.”
• Determination and Courage Quote: “Courage is not the absence of fear, but the determination to overcome it.”
• Determination and Dedication Quote: “Dedication is the foundation of success, and determination is the building block that makes it happen.”
• Determination and Self-Discipline Quote: “Self-discipline is the key to unlocking your potential, and determination is the force that drives it.”
• Determination and Focus Quote: “Focus on your goals, and let determination be the driving force behind your success.”
• Determination and Goal Setting Quote: “Goals give direction to your determination, and determination turns your goals into reality.”
• Determination and Ambition Quote: “Ambition is the starting point of success, and determination is the vehicle that takes you there.”
• Determination and Willpower Quote: “Willpower is the fuel that drives determination, and determination is the engine that powers success.”
• Determination and Patience Quote: “Patience and determination are the two wings that will help you soar to new heights of success.”
• Determination and Resilience Quote: “Resilience is the ability to keep going despite setbacks, and determination is the force that fuels it.”
• Determination and Mental Toughness Quote: “Mental toughness is the ability to stay focused and determined even in the face of adversity.”
• Determination and Positive Thinking Quote: “Positive thinking empowers determination, and determination empowers success.”
• Determination and Grit Quote: “Grit is the combination of passion and perseverance, and determination is the fuel that keeps it burning.”
• Determination and Focus in Sports Quote: “In sports, focus is the key to success, and determination is the engine that drives it forward.”

Hello! Welcome to my Blog StudyParagraphs.co. My name is Angelina. I am a college professor. I love reading writing for kids students. This blog is full with valuable knowledge for all class students. Thank you for reading my articles.

Related Posts:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.