Republic of the Philippines

Western Mindanao State University

Pagadian External Campus
Bulatok, Pagadian City

PED 101- The Child and Adolescent Learner and the Learning Principle

Lesson 10 : DEVELOPMENT OF MOTIVATION AND SELF -REGULATION

B. PROCESS THEORIES
1. Reinforcement Theory (Skinner)
2. Expectancy Theory (Vroom)
3. Goal Setting Theory (Locke)
4. Self Determination Theory (Deci And Ryan)

1. Reinforcement Theory (Skinner)

Reinforcement theory of motivation was proposed by BF Skinner and his associates. It states that
individual’s behaviour is a function of its consequences. It is based on “law of effect”, i.e,
individual’s behaviour with positive consequences tends to be repeated, but individual’s
behaviour with negative consequences tends not to be repeated.

Reinforcement theory of motivation overlooks the internal state of individual, i.e., the inner
feelings and drives of individuals are ignored by Skinner. This theory focuses totally on what
happens to an individual when he takes some action. Thus, according to Skinner, the external
environment of the organization must be designed effectively and positively so as to motivate the
employee. This theory is a strong tool for analyzing controlling mechanism for individual’s
behaviour. However, it does not focus on the causes of individual’s behaviour.

The managers use the following methods for controlling the behaviour of the employees:

Positive Reinforcement- This implies giving a positive response when an individual

shows positive and required behaviour. For example -Immediately praising an employee for
coming early for job. This will increase probability of outstanding behaviour occurring again.
Reward is a positive reinforce, but not necessarily. If and only if the employees’ behaviour
improves, reward can said to be a positive reinforcer. Positive reinforcement stimulates
occurrence of abehaviour. It must be noted that more spontaneous is the giving of reward, the
greater reinforcement value it has.

Negative Reinforcement- This implies rewarding an employee by removing negative /

undesirable consequences. Both positive and negative reinforcement can be used for increasing
desirable / required behaviour.

Punishment- It implies removing positive consequences so as to lower the probability of

repeating undesirable behaviour in future. In other words, punishment means applying
undesirable consequence for showing undesirable behaviour. For instance -Suspending an
employee for breaking the organizational rules. Punishment can be equalized by positive
reinforcement from alternative source.

Extinction- It implies absence of reinforcements. In other words, extinction implies

lowering the probability of undesired behaviour by removing reward for that kind of behaviour.
For instance - if an employee no longer receives praise and admiration for his good work, he may
feel that his behaviour is generating no fruitful consequence. Extinction may unintentionally
lower desirable behaviour.

Implications of Reinforcement Theory

Reinforcement theory explains in detail how an individual learns behaviour. Managers who are
making attempt to motivate the employees must ensure that they do not reward all employees
simultaneously. They must tell the employees what they are not doing correct. They must tell the
employees how they can achieve positive reinforcement.

2. Expentancy Theory (Vroom)

Vroom’s expectancy theory of motivation says that individuals are motivated to do something by
three things. They are motivated when they value the reward associated with an action, trust that
they’ll receive the reward if they do a good job and believe that they have the ability to achieve
their objectives by working hard.

Victor Vroom’s expectancy theory of motivation is a process theory of motivation. It says

that an individual’s motivation is affected by their expectations about the future.

Specifically, Vroom says that an individual’s motivation is affected by how much they value any
reward associated with an action (Valence), how much they believe that by putting effort into
something they will be able to generate good results (Expectancy) and how much they believe
that generating good results will result in a reward (Instrumentality).

It’s important to note that rewards could be intrinsic or extrinsic. Extrinsic motivations are
external things such as money and promotion. Intrinsic motivations are internal things such as a
sense of fulfillment and achievement.

Vroom's Expectancy Theory of Motivation is comprised of Valency, Instrumentality and

Expectation. Motivation is a function of valence, instrumentality and expectancy.

What Vroom’s model means for individuals

Vroom says that an individual’s motivation is product of several factors:
Expectancy is a key part of Vroom's Expectancy Theory of Motivation. It’s not just dogs that
like treats.
Valence: How much they value the potential rewards associated with the specific results or
behaviors,
Expectancy: How much they believe that their additional effort will help them achieve the target
results of behaviors, and
Instrumentality: How much they believe the rewards will actually appear should they achieve the
desired outcomes or behaviors.
From an individual perspective this means that if any of these factors are lacking, you may lack
motivation.
If, as an individual, you find yourself feeling unmotivated in the world of work, it’s worth
stepping back and considering these factors. It may be that one or two of them are lacking for
you. For example, you may not value the intrinsic or extrinsic rewards associated with the work
you are doing. Similarly, you may simply believe that you don’t have the ability to achieve an
outcome that would trigger a reward.
If you assess your motivation through the lens of Vroom’s expectancy theory, you may identify
root causes for your lack of motivation. In turn, this might help identify actions you could take to
restore it. As ever, you may need help from others to restore your motivation. you may benefit
from discussing your thoughts with a peer, friend or even your line manager.
What Vroom’s Expectancy Theory of Motivation means for leaders and organizations
If you set goals that people can’t reach, they won’t be motivated.
Vroom’s model helps make clear that leaders or organizations need to:
1 – Provide rewards that individuals value
These could be intrinsic aspects designed into rewarding role descriptions, they could be
recognition, they could be new opportunities or they could be financial rewards. In fact, they
could be a huge range of things. The important point is that you find the right rewards for your
people.
2 – Set achievable objectives for individuals
The objectives you set don’t need to be easy. But they do need to be in the power of your team
members to achieve. This may mean that the individuals in your teams need to be empowered to
achieve things and it may mean that they need to be supported to do so. It also means that the
system that you are asking them to operate within isn’t stacked against them.
3 – Provide promised rewards when they are earned
This is all about trust. To be trustworthy in this context you need to provide the implicit and
explicit outcomes and rewards that you have agreed to provide. If you don’t do this, trust will be
broken. When trust is broken individuals will cease to be motivated by your proposed rewards.
3. Goal Setting Theory (Locke)
Goal-setting theory of motivation states that specific and challenging goals along with
appropriate feedback contribute to higher and better task performance.
Goals indicate and give direction to an employee about what needs to be done and how much
effort is required to be put in.
In the 1960s, Edwin Locke put forward the goal-setting theory of motivation. The theory states
that goal setting is essentially linked to task performance.
In the goal-setting theory, goals must be set based on 5 principles. To motivate, goals must have
these.

7 Goal Setting Theory Principles

7 principles of goal setting theory are;
1. Clarity.
2. Challenge.
3. Commitment.
4. Feedback.
5. Task Complexity.
6. Self-efficiency.
7. Goal commitment.

1. Clarity
Clear goals are measurable and unambiguous.
When a goal is dear and specific, with a definite time set for completion, there is less
misunderstanding about what behaviors will be rewarded.
“Reduce job turnover by 15%” or “Respond to employee suggestions within 48 hours” are
examples of dear goals.
2. Challenge
One of the most important characteristics of goals is the level of challenge.
People are often motivated by achievement, and they’ll judge a goal based on the significance of
the anticipated accomplishment.
Rewards typically increase for more difficult goals. If you believe you’ll be well compensated or
otherwise rewarded for achieving a challenging goal that will boost your enthusiasm and your
drive to get it done.
If an assignment is easy and not viewed as very important – and if you or your employee doesn’t
expect the accomplishment to be significant – then the effort may not be impressive.

3. Commitment
Goals must be understood and agreed upon if they are to be effective. Employees are more likely
to “buy into” a goal if they feel they were part of creating that goal.
The notion of participative management rests on this idea of involving employees in setting goals
and making decisions.
4. Feedback
In addition to selecting the right type of goal, an effective goal program must also include
feedback. Feedback provides opportunities to clarify expectations, adjust goal difficulty, and
gain recognition.
It’s important to provide benchmark opportunities or targets, so individuals can determine for
themselves how they’re doing.
5. Task complexity
The last factor in the goal-setting theory introduces two more requirements for success. For goals
or assignments that are highly complex, take special care to ensure that the work doesn’t become
too overwhelming.
Goal-setting theory has certain eventualities such as Self-efficiency and Goal commitment.
6. Self-efficiency
Self-efficiency is the individual’s self-confidence and faith that he has potential.
if performing the task. Higher the level of self-efficiency, greater will be the efforts pm in by the
individual when they face challenging tasks.
While lower the level of self-efficiency, less will be the efforts put in by the individual or he
might even quit while meeting challenges.
7. Goal commitment
The goal-setting theory assumes that the individual is committed to the goal and will not leave
the goal. The goal commitment is dependent on the following factors:

Goals are made open, known and broadcasted.

Goals should be set-self by individuals rather than designated.
The individual’s set should be consistent with organizational goals and vision.
Features of Goal Setting Theory
The willingness to work towards the attainment of the goal is the main source of job motivation.
Clear, particular and difficult goals arc greater motivating factors than easy, general and vague
goals.
Specific and clear goals lead to greater output and better performance. Unambiguous, measurable
and clear goals accompanied by a deadline for completion avoids misunderstanding.
Goals should be realistic and challenging. This gives an individual a feeling of pride and triumph
when he attains them, and sets him up for the attainment of the next goal. The more challenging
the goal the greater is the reward generally and the more is the passion for achieving it.
Better and appropriate feedback of results directs the employee behavior and contributes to
higher performance than an absence of feedback. Feedback is a means of gaining reputation,
making clarifications and regulating goal difficulties. It helps employees to work with more
involvement and leads to greater job satisfaction.
Employees’ participation in goal is not always desirable. Participation in setting the goal,
however, makes the goal more acceptable and leads to more involvement.
Advantages of Goal Setting Theory
Goal-setting theory is a technique used to raise incentives for employees to complete work
quickly effectively.
Goal setting leads to better performance by increasing motivation and efforts, but also through
increasing and improving the feedback quality.
Limitations of Goal Setting theory
At times, the organizational goals conflict with the managerial goals. Goal conflict has a
detrimental effect on the performance if it motivates incompatible action drift.
Very difficult and complex goals stimulate riskier behavior.

4. Self Determination Theory (Deci And Ryan)

You may be familiar with “self-determination” in the context of foundational government

documents and speeches from people long-dead.

Traditionally, self-determination has been more used in this diplomatic and political context to
describe the process a country undergoes to assert its independence. However, self-determination
also has a more personal and psychology-relevant meaning today: the ability or process of
making one’s own choices and controlling one’s own life.

Self-determination is a vital piece of psychological well-being; as you may expect, people like to
feel control of their own lives.

In addition to this idea of controlling one’s own destiny, the theory of self-determination is
relevant to anyone hoping to guide their live more.
What is the Meaning of Self-Determination Theory?

Self-Determination Theory, or SDT, links personality, human motivation, and optimal

functioning. It posits that there are two main types of motivation—intrinsic and extrinsic—and
that both are powerful forces in shaping who we are and how we behave (Deci & Ryan, 2008). It
is a theory that grew out of researchers Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan’s work on
motivation in the 1970s and 1980s. Although it has grown and expanded since then, the basic
tenets of the theory come from Deci and Ryan’s seminal 1985 book on the topic.

Deci and Ryan’s Theory of Motivation (1985)

According to Deci and Ryan, extrinsic motivation is a drive to behave in certain ways based on
external sources and it results in external rewards (1985). Such sources include grading systems,
employee evaluations, awards and accolades, and the respect and admiration of others.

On the other hand, intrinsic motivation comes from within. There are internal drives that inspire
us to behave in certain ways, including our core values, our interests, and our personal sense of
morality.

It might seem like intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation are diametrically opposed—with
intrinsic driving behavior in keeping with our “ideal self” and extrinsic leading us to conform
with the standards of others—but there is another important distinction in the types of
motivation. SDT differentiates between autonomous motivation and controlled motivation (Ryan
& Deci, 2008).

Autonomous motivation includes motivation that comes from internal sources and includes
motivation from extrinsic sources for individuals who identify with an activity’s value and how it
aligns with their sense of self. Controlled motivation is comprised of external regulation—a type
of motivation where an individual acts out of the desire for external rewards or fear of
punishment. On the other hand, introjected regulation is motivation from “partially internalized
activities and values” such as avoiding shame, seeking approval, and protecting the ego.

When an individual is driven by autonomous motivation, they may feel self-directed and
autonomous; when the individual is driven by controlled motivation, they may feel pressure to
behave in a certain way, and thus, experience little to no autonomy (Ryan & Deci, 2008).

The Self-Determination Model, Scale, and Continuum

We are complex beings who are rarely driven by only one type of motivation. Different goals,
desires, and ideas inform us what we want and need. Thus, it is useful to think of motivation on a
continuum ranging from “non-self-determined to self-determined.”

Self Determination Theory Diagram

At the left end of the spectrum, we have a motivation, in which an individual is completely non-
autonomous, has no drive to speak of, and is struggling to have any of their needs met. In the
middle, we have several levels of extrinsic motivation.
One step to the right of a motivation is external regulation, in which motivation is exclusively
external and regulated by compliance, conformity, and external rewards and punishments.

The next level of extrinsic motivation is termed introjected regulation, in which the motivation is
somewhat external and is driven by self-control, efforts to protect the ego, and internal rewards
and punishments.

In identified regulation, the motivation is somewhat internal and based on conscious values and
that which is personally important to the individual.

The final step of extrinsic motivation is integrated regulation, in which intrinsic sources and the
desire to be self-aware are guiding an individual’s behavior.

The right end of the continuum shows an individual entirely motivated by intrinsic sources. In
intrinsic regulation, the individual is self-motivated and self-determined, and driven by interest,
enjoyment, and the satisfaction inherent in the behavior or activity he or she is engaging in.

Although self-determination is generally the goal for individuals, we can’t help but be motivated
by external sources—and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Both intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation are highly influential determinants of our behavior, and both drive us to meet the
three basic needs identified by the SDT model:

Self-determination theory three needs

Autonomy: people have a need to feel that they are the masters of their own destiny and that they
have at least some control over their lives; most importantly, people have a need to feel that they
are in control of their own behavior.
Competence: another need concerns our achievements, knowledge, and skills; people have a
need to build their competence and develop mastery over tasks that are important to them.
Relatedness (also called Connection): people need to have a sense of belonging and
connectedness with others; each of us needs other people to some degree (Deci & Ryan, 2008).

According to the developers of SDT, Deci and Richard M. Ryan, individual differences in
personality result from the varying degrees to which each need has been satisfied—or thwarted
(2008). The two main aspects on which individuals differ include causality orientations and
aspirations or life goals.

Causality orientations refer to how people adapt and orient themselves to their environment and
their degree of self-determination in general, across many different contexts. The three causality
orientations are:

Autonomous: all three basic needs are satisfied.

Controlled: competence and relatedness are somewhat satisfied but autonomy is not.
Impersonal: none of the three needs are satisfied.
Aspirations or life goals are what people use to guide their own behavior. They generally fall
into one of the two categories of motivation mentioned earlier: intrinsic or extrinsic. Deci and
Ryan provide affiliation, generativity, and personal development as examples of intrinsic life
goals, while they list wealth, fame, and attractiveness as examples of extrinsic life goals (2008).
Aspirations and life goals drive us, but they are considered learned desires instead of basic needs
like autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

SDT presents two sub-theories for a more nuanced understanding of intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation. These sub-theories are Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET) and Organismic
Integration Theory (OIT) which help explain intrinsic motivation with regards to its social
factors and the various degrees of contextual factors that influence extrinsic motivation (Deci &
Ryan, 2000).

Let’s take a deeper look:

Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET)

According to CET intrinsic motivation can be facilitating or undermining, depending on the

social and environmental factors in play. Referring to the Needs Theory, Deci & Ryan
(1985,2000) argue that interpersonal events, rewards, communication and feedback that gear
towards feelings of competence when performing an activity will enhance intrinsic motivation
for that particular activity.

However, this level of intrinsic motivation is not attained if the individual doesn’t feel that the
performance itself is self- determined or that they had the autonomous choice to perform this
activity.

So, for a high level of intrinsic motivation two psychological needs have to be fulfilled:

The first is competence so that the activity results in feelings of self-development and efficacy.
The second is the need for autonomy that the performance of the chosen activity was self-
initiated or self-determined.

Thus for CET theory to hold true, motivation needs to be intrinsic and have an appeal to the
individual. It also implies that intrinsic motivation will be enhanced or undermined depending on
whether the needs for autonomy and competence are supported or thwarted respectively.

It is believed that the use of the needs for autonomy and competence are linked to our
motivations. Deci conducted a study on the effects of extrinsic rewards on people’s intrinsic
motivation.

Results showed that when people received extrinsic rewards (e.g., money) for doing something,
eventually they were less interested and less likely to do it later, compared to people who did the
same activity without receiving the reward.

The results were interpreted as the participants’ behavior, which was initially intrinsically
motivated, became controlled by the rewards which lead to an undermined sense of autonomy.
This concept is beautifully explained in this video by RSA Animate.
Organismic Integration Theory (OIT)

The second sub-theory is Organismic Integration Theory (OIT) that argues that extrinsic
motivation depends on the extent to which autonomy is present.

In other words, extrinsic motivation varies according to the internalization and integration of the
value of the activity. Internalization is how well the value of an activity is felt while integration
explains the process of individual transformation from external regulation to their own self-
regulated version (Ryan & Deci,2000).

For instance, school assignments are externally regulated activities. Internalization here could be
if the child sees the value and importance of the assignment; integration in this situation is the
degree to which the child perceives performing the assignment as their own choice.

The OIT thus offers us a greater perspective on the different levels of extrinsic motivation that
exist and the processes of internalization and integration, which could eventually result in the
autonomous choice of performing the activity for its intrinsic perceived joy and value.

Examples of SDT in Psychology

To understand self-determination theory, it can be useful to see some examples of people who
are high in self-determination, or thinking and acting in an autonomous and intrinsically
motivated fashion.

The best description of a self-determined individual is someone who:

Believes she is in control of her own life.

Take responsibility for her own behavior (taking credit and blame when either is warranted).
Is self-motivated instead of driven by others’ standards or external sources.
Determines her actions based on her own internal values and goals.

For example, imagine a high school student who fails an important test. If she is high in self-
determination—feels responsible for her actions, believes she is in control of her behavior, etc.—
she might tell her parents that she could have spent more time studying and that she plans to
carve out some extra time to study. Her plan of action would be the same whether her parents
were upset or apathetic, because she herself is motivated by an internal desire to be competent
and knowledgeable.

If this same student is low in self-determination—feels that she is not in control of her life and
that she is a victim of circumstance—she might blame the teacher for giving a tough test that
students were not ready for. She may blame her parents for not helping her study or her friends
for distracting her. If she does care about her grade, it is not due to an internal desire to do well,
but a desire to win her parents’ approval, or perhaps bolster her self-image by getting the best
grade in the class or impressing her teacher with her knowledge.
The man who decides to start a new hobby because he thinks he’ll enjoy it is exhibiting self-
determination, while the man who begins a new hobby because it seems prestigious or
impressive, is not.

Similarly, the woman who blames all of her ex-lovers for ruining their relationships is not
displaying self-determination; the woman who takes responsibility for her part in contributing to
unhappy past relationships is showing self-determination.

You may have spotted the theme here: those who take responsibility for their actions and do
things because they align with their own personal values and goals are self-determined. Those
who blame others, see themselves as constant victims and do things solely for external approval
or recognition, are not.

self-determination theory examples

Self-Determination Theory Questionnaires
If you’re interested in using a questionnaire or scale to measure self-determination, this website
is an excellent resource. Feel free to use any of them for academic or research purposes, but
please note that to use any of the scales for commercial purposes, you will need to seek
permission from Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan.

They list 17 questionnaires that are either directly or indirectly related to self-determination
theory. These questionnaires are listed below.

Aspiration Index
This scale measures the extent to which seven broad goal domains motivate the individual,
including wealth, fame, image, personal growth, relationships, community contribution, and
health. Respondents rate the importance of each aspiration, their beliefs about the likelihood they
will attain each, and the degree to which they have already attained each. You can find the
complete packet for this scale here.

Basic Psychological Needs Scale (BPNS)

This scale was developed to assess the extent to which the individual feels each of the three basic
needs—autonomy, competence, and relatedness—have been satisfied in his or her life. This scale
has been developed for several contexts, like work and relationships, but there is a more general
form as well. You can learn more about this scale or download a version for your own use here.

Christian Religious Internalization Scale (CRIS)

The CRIS, also known as the Religion Self-Regulation Questionnaire or SRQ-R, can determine
the reasons why an individual engages in religious behavior. The scale is divided into two
subscales: Introjected Regulation, representing the more externally motivating factors, and
Identified Regulation, representing the more internally motivation factors. There is a long form
version with 48 items and a shorter, psychometrically sound 12-item version. Click here to learn
more about the CRIS.

General Causality Orientations Scale

The General Causality Orientations Scale, or GCOS, can determine the degree to which the
respondent embodies the three orientations: the autonomy orientation, the controlled orientation,
and the impersonal orientation. The GCOS presents vignettes, or descriptions of common social
or achievement-oriented situations, and asks respondents to indicate how typical each of three
responses is for them on a 7-point Likert scale. It is also available in a long form (17 vignettes
and 51 items) and a short form (12 vignettes and 36 items). You can learn more about the GCOS
or download it at this link.

Health-Care SDT Packet (HC-SDT)

The HC-SDT is comprised of three scales that measure self-regulation (SRQ), perceived
competence (PCS), and perceived autonomy supportiveness of healthcare climate (HCCQ), three
self-determination constructs related to health behaviors. The scales target four health behaviors:
smoking cessation, diet improvement, exercising regularly and drinking responsibly. Click here
to learn more about the HC-SDT.

Index of Autonomous Functioning (IAF)

The IAF measures trait autonomy based on three subscales: authorship/self-congruence, interest-
taking, and low susceptibility to control. The first subscale assesses the degree to which the
individual views his behavior as under his control and the consistency among his behaviors,
attitudes, and traits. The second assesses his ongoing insight into himself and his experiences in
an open-minded manner, and the third assesses the absence of internal and external pressures as
motivators for his behavior. You can download the scale at this link.

Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI)

This scale was developed for use in experiments, and measures the extent to which respondents
found an activity interesting or enjoyable, their perceived competence at the task, the effort they
put into the task, how valuable or useful they found it, how much tension or pressure they felt,
and how much choice they felt they had while completing it. The interest/enjoyment subscale is
considered the individual’s self-reported level of intrinsic motivation in the experiment. Click
here to download the scale and learn more.

Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS)

The MAAS may be familiar to you if you’ve read any of our pieces on mindfulness. It provides a
measure of “receptive awareness and attention to present-moment events and experience.” It
consists of 15 items, all of which comprise a single factor. SDT co-developer Richard M. Ryan
developed this scale with another colleague in 2003. Click here to learn more about the MAAS
scale and see suggested reading on mindfulness.

Motivators’ Orientation
The Motivators’ Orientation set of questionnaires measures the extent to which an individual in a
supervisory capacity tends to be autonomy-supportive versus controlling. There are two
questionnaires designed for specific contexts: the Problems in Schools Questionnaire (PIS) is
designed for teachers, while the Problems at Work Questionnaire (PAW) is designed for
managers in a work environment. Each questionnaire requires respondents to read eight vignettes
and rate four behavioral options on appropriateness for the situation. The four options represent
four tendencies: Highly Autonomy Supportive (HA), Moderately Autonomy Supportive (MA),
Moderately Controlling (MC), and Highly Controlling, (HC). You can learn more about these
scales here.

Motives for Physical Activity Measure (MPAM-R)

The MPAM-R assesses the strength of five different motivations for participating in a physical
activity like team sports, aerobics, or weight lifting: (1) fitness, (2) appearance, (3)
competence/challenge, (4) social, and (5) enjoyment. The results of this scale can reliably predict
behavioral outcomes like attendance, persistence, and maintained participation, as well as
constructs like mental health and well-being. You can find more information on this scale at this
link.

Perceived Autonomy Support

This is a set of scales that measures the individual’s perceptions of the extent to which a
particular social context is autonomy-supportive or controlling. It includes the aforementioned
health care climate questionnaire (HCCQ) as well as scales on the learning climate (LCQ), the
work climate (WCQ), the sports climate (SCQ), and the parental autonomy support climate (P-
PASS). Respondents rate the autonomy supportiveness of the context on a 7-point scale, with
higher scores indicating greater autonomy support. There are two versions for each scale: a long,
15-item version and a short, 5-item version. Click here to learn more about these scales.

Perceived Choice and Awareness of Self Scale (formerly the Self-Determination Scale [SDS])
This scale, which was previously known as simply the Self-Determination Scale (SDS),
measures individual differences in perceived choice, or the feeling that one has choices in how to
behave, and awareness of self, or the awareness of one’s own feelings and sense of self. The
PCASS is only 10 items long and is composed of two 5-item scales (one for each construct).
Follow this link to learn more about the PCASS.

Perceived Competence Scale (PCS)

The PCS is a short questionnaire that measures perceived competence in a specific behavior or
area. It is only 4 items long, and it is intended to be adapted for the specific behavior or area
being studied. Click here to learn more about the PCS.

Perceptions of Parents
This scale for children was designed to measure how autonomy-supportive or controlling they
perceive their parents to be. There are two versions of this scale: a 22-item version for children 8
years or older, and a 42-item version for college students. You can learn more about this scale
and the two versions here.

Self-Regulation Questionnaires (SRQ)

The SRQ scales measure individual differences in regulation or motivation of behavior. There
are seven self-regulation questionnaires listed on the website: the Academic Self-Regulation
Questionnaire (SRQ-A) and the Prosocial Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-P), both of which
are intended for children, and the Treatment Self-Regulation Questionnaire (TSRQ), the
Learning Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-L), the Exercise Self-Regulation Questionnaire
(SRQ-E), the Religion Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-R), and the Friendship Self-
Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-F), which are all intended for adults. You can find these
questionnaires at this link.

Subjective Vitality Scale (VS)

The Subjective Vitality Scale, or VS, assesses the extent to which an individual feels alive, alert,
and energetic—a vital aspect of well-being. There are two versions, one of which considers
individual differences (vitality as a trait or characteristic), while the other measures vitality as a
more transitory experience (vitality as a state). The items are generally the same, only the
timeframe differs (long-term and stable for the trait version vs. short-term and fluctuating for the
state version). The original scale consisted of 7 items, but a shorter, 6-item version has proven to
be even more sound than the original. You can learn more about the scale here.
Treatment Motivation Questionnaire (TMQ)
Finally, the TMQ is used to assess motivation for receiving treatment. It measures the strength of
four types of motivation on treatment attendance and compliance behaviors: intrinsic motivation,
identified regulation, introjected regulation, and external regulation. You can download the scale
or learn more about it here.

If you’re interested in assessing more traits and behaviors, please see our piece on mindfulness
scales and questionnaires.

Self-Determination Theory and Goals

Self-Determination Theory and Goals
SDT has a lot to say about goals and goal striving. The theory proposes that not only is the
content of our goals (i.e., what we strive for) important for our need satisfaction and well-being,
the process of our goals (i.e., why we strive for them) is just as influential on our well-being. The
degree to which behavioral regulation of goal striving is autonomous (or self-directed) versus
controlled is a significant predictor of well-being outcomes.

In other words, we are more satisfied and successful when we can pursue goals in “our own
way” rather than according to a strict, external system of regulation. Even when pursuing
extrinsic rewards like wealth or fame, we are more satisfied and self-actualized when we pursue
them autonomously, for our own reasons and with our own methods (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

Further research on SDT and goals has confirmed the connection between success and autonomy
and supported the idea that success is also more likely when our goals are intrinsic and intended
to satisfy our basic needs. Success in goal-striving is more likely when we are supported by
empathetic and supportive people, rather than controlling or directive people (Koestner & Hope,
2014).

Self-Determination Theory in (Special) Education and Disability

It’s easy to see how SDT applies to education: students are more likely to learn and succeed in
school when they are intrinsically motivated by their need for competence than when they are
extrinsically motivated by teachers, parents, or the grading system.

SDT is doubly important for children in special education and those with disabilities. These
students are often struggling with meeting their need for autonomy, as many decisions are made
for them and they may not have the physical or intellectual ability to be truly autonomous. Their
disability may interfere with their need for competence, as it can hamper their efforts to master
tasks and develop their knowledge. Finally, those with disabilities—physical, mental, or both—
often find it difficult to connect with their peers. All of these extra struggles explain why it’s
vital for students with disabilities to have a sense of self-determination.

Although they may not be able to satisfy their needs in the most straightforward or common
ways, special education students can gain a sense of self-determination in other ways. For
example, research has suggested that programs designed to improve the following skills and
abilities can boost a student’s self-determination:
Self-awareness
Decision-making
Goal-setting
Goal attainment
Communication and relationship skills
Ability to celebrate success and learn from mistakes
Reflection on experiences (Field & Hoffman, 1994).

Enhancing the self-determination of students with disabilities has been shown to result in many
positive outcomes, including a greater likelihood of gainful employment and a higher chance of
living independently in the community (Wehmeyer & Schwartz, 1997; Wehmeyer & Palmer,
2003).

Self-Determination Theory and Work Motivation

SDT has also generated some important insights about work motivation. While there are many
theories about work motivation and engagement, SDT is unique in its focus on the “relative
strength of autonomous versus controlled motivation, rather than on the total amount of
motivation” (Gagné & Deci, 2005).

Although the overall amount of motivation is certainly a factor, it’s important not to lose sight of
the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivators; for example, SDT is correct in its
assumption that extrinsic rewards are related to reduced intrinsic motivation. There is also
evidence for a positive relationship between a manager’s autonomy support and their employees’
work outcomes. A manager’s autonomy leads to greater levels of need satisfaction for their
employees, which in turn boosts job satisfaction, performance evaluations, persistence,
acceptance of organizational change, and psychological adjustment.

Finally, there is a link between managerial autonomy and subordinate autonomy, performance,
and organizational commitment, as well as a link between transformational or visionary
leadership and followers’ autonomous (vs. controlled) goals (Gagné & Deci, 2005).

Self-Determination Theory and Work Motivation

Clearly, SDT has some vital applications in the workplace, namely:

Extrinsic rewards should be considered with caution; too few can lead to a sense that employees
are not appreciated or fairly compensated and recognized, but too many can inhibit intrinsic
motivation.
Managers should support their employees’ need for satisfaction, especially autonomy; this can
lead to happier and more competent employees as well as better organizational outcomes.
When managers are themselves high in autonomy, their subordinates are likely to be high in
autonomy as well, leading to better performance and higher organizational commitment.
Good leadership encourages employees to set their own, autonomously conceived and regulated
goals, which are more motivating and more likely to end in success than goals assigned to them
by management.

Self-Determination Theory in Social Work

SDT is a foundational idea in social work: the idea that every person has a right to determine his
or her own direction and make her or her own decisions in life. Although every person has a
right to self-determination, marginalized, disadvantaged, and disenfranchised people may
struggle with finding their own self-determination (Furlong, 2003). Hence, it is vital for those in
the social work profession to incorporate the principle of self-determination into their work.

The National Association of Social Workers holds this principle as a central tenet to the
profession:

“Social workers respect and promote the right of clients to self-determination and assist clients in
their efforts to identify and clarify their goals. Social workers may limit clients’ right to self-
determination when, in the social workers’ professional judgment, clients’ actions or potential
actions pose a serious, foreseeable, and imminent risk to themselves or others.”

Guidelines related to self-determination require a constant commitment to allow clients to make

their own decisions, with ample support and information from the social worker rather than
direction and control. It also requires that a social worker be aware of their own values and
beliefs to ensure that they are not influencing clients towards a direction they did not choose for
themselves (Fanning, 2015).

It’s a fine line to walk between looking out for the client’s best interests and allowing them to
find their own way, which is one reason why social work is a challenging and demanding
profession!

Self-Determination Theory in Sports

SDT has also been fruitfully applied to research on sports participation and achievement.
Unsurprisingly, intrinsic motivation is a far more impactful driver of behavior in terms of goal
attainment than extrinsic rewards, and in no context is this fact easier to see than in sports.

Research has shown that:

Those who are amotivated (not motivated by intrinsic or extrinsic factors) or motivated by
external regulation and meeting external standards are more likely to drop out of sports teams or
leagues.
Those who are amotivated or externally motivated are generally lower in need satisfaction,
specifically the needs of relatedness and autonomy (Calvo, Cervelló, Jiménez, Iglesias, &
Murcia, 2010).

self-determination theory sports

Further, in work on SDT and general exercise or physical activity, findings have included:

Those who are autonomously motivated are more likely to adhere to exercise over time and enter
the state of flow (a la Csikszentmihalyi’s theory of flow).
Those who are autonomously motivated have a higher perceived competence and psychological
well-being.
Autonomous support from others encourages individuals’ autonomous motivation related to
exercise.
An internal locus of causality (versus external) promotes greater success in exercise endeavors
(Hagger, & Chatzisarantis, 2008).

As with self-determination in many other contexts, those with a high sense of it are more likely
to stick with their goals and eventually achieve them.

Self-Determination Theory in Nursing and Healthcare

Likewise, self-determination theory can explain trends in nursing and healthcare. For example,
intrinsic motivation and autonomy drive patient compliance with medical instructions, but
motivation to comply with standards is also significant for patients (Kofi, 2017).

Another recent study provided support for the hypothesis that a health care practitioner’s
autonomy support encourages patients to engage in healthier behavior, boosts their perceived
competence in those behaviors, and can even enhance their sense of mindfulness in addition to
helping them meet the three basic needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness; Martin, Byrd,
Wooster, & Kulik, 2017).

Just as self-determination is vital for students in educational settings, it is vital for patients in
healthcare settings. When patients feel they have little control over their lives and they are not
supported in their decision-making by healthcare professionals, they will likely struggle to get
their needs met and have worse health outcomes.

Healthcare professionals should keep these findings in mind when interacting with their patients
if they have an interest in encouraging healthy behavior outside of the examination room.

How to Promote and Encourage Self-Determination Skills

It may be difficult to think about how self-determination skills can be taught or encouraged in
others. This might feel like a trick question, since self-determination is, by definition, not
directed by others!

However, there are some things you can do to help children and young adults develop self-
determination.

Specifically, it can help to enhance and encourage their:

Self-awareness and self-knowledge

Goal-setting ability
Problem-solving skills
Decision-making skills
Ability to self-advocate
Ability to create action plans to achieve their goals
Self-regulation and self-management skills (Wehmeyer, 2002).