User:HollyOddie

Me and my class mate Peter Musham eddited the 'Self and Determination Theory web page I contributed to 0 Intro: Edited

1 Basic Theory: Created

2 Basic Needs and Intrinsic Motivation: Created

3 Individual Differences: Created

4 Key studies: Edited and formatted 9 References Self Determination Theory (SDT) Macro theory of human motivation and personality, concerning peoples inherent growth tendencies and their innate psychological needs History The theory itself dates back for 1970’s (Deci 1971, 75) Advancing during the 1980’s with Deci and Ryans 1985 study However Deci and Ryan claim it truly developed in the 2000 due to greater research into motivational principles Basic Theory Belief that human nature show persistent positive features, repeatedly showing effort, agency and commitment in their lives called inherent growth tendencies. Peoples also have innate psychological needs that are the basis for self motivation and personality integration. Self Determination theory identifies three innate needs that if satisfied are essential for optimal function and growth Competence –Hartre 1978 and White 1963) Relatedness (Baumeister and leary 1995 Reis 1994) Autonomy (deCharms 1968 Deci 1975 These needs are seen as universal necessities that are innate not learned and seen in humanity across time gender and culture (Chirkov Ryan Kim and Kaplan 2003) Deci, Vansteenkiste (paper 3) claim three essential elements of the theory 1.	Humans are inherently proactive with their potential and mastering their inner forces (such as drives and emotions) assumption backed up by Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi 2000

2.	Humans have inherent tendency toward growth development and integrated functioning

3.	Optimal development and action’s are inherent in human’s but they don’t happen automatically To actualise their inherent potential they need nurturing from social environment If this happens there are positive consequence (e.g. well being and growth) if it doesn’t there are negative ones So Self Deterministic theory emphasise humans natural growth toward positive motivation, however this is thwarted if their basic needs are not fulfilled Needs Self Determination theory purports three basic psychological needs, (Competence Autonomy and Relatedness). That must be satisfied to foster well being and health, these need can be universally applied. However some may be more salient than others at certain times and will be expressed differently based on time, culture or experience. Competence – Refers to being effective in dealing with the environment a person finds themselves in – White 1959 Relatedness – Is the universal want to interact, be connected to and experience caring for others – Baumeister, Leary 1995 Autonomy: Is the universal urge to be causal agents of our own life. And act in harmony with our integrated self. However Deci and Vansteenkiste ( third study )note this doesn’t mean to be independent of others Motivations Self Determination theory claims to give a different approach to motivation, considering what motivates a person at any given time as opposed to seeing motivation as a unitary concept. Self determination thery makes distinctions between different types of motivation and the consequences of them Intrinsic Motivations The first kind is intrinsic motivations Which are inherent drives to seek out challenges and new possibilities that SDT associated with cognitive and social development. Cognitive Evaluation Theory (D and R 1985) is a sub theory of SDT that specifies factors explaining intrinsic motivation and variability with it It looks at how social and environmental factors helped or hinder intrinsic motivations Believing that intrinsic motivations being inherent should flourish if circumstance allow CET focuses on the needs of competence and autonomy Claiming social context events like feedback on work or rewards lead to feelings of competence and so enhance intrinsic motivations Indeed Deci 1975 found positive feedback enhanced intrinsic motivations and negative feedback diminished it. Vallerand and Reid 1984 went further and found that these effects were being mediated by perceived control Autonomy however must accompany competence in order for people to see their behaviours as self determined by intrinsic motivation For this to happen there must be immediate contextual support for both needs or inner resources based of prior development support for both needs(Reeve 1996) CET and intrinsic motivation is also linked to relatedness through the hypothesis that intrinsic motivation will flourish if linked with a sense of security and relatedness There is various experimental support for this Ryan and Grolnick 1989 who found lower intrinsic motivation in children who believe their teachers to be uncaring or cold and so not fulfilling their relatedness needs Extrinsic Motivation The second set of motivations inentified by SDT are extrinsic motivations, motivations that come from external sources. These motivations prompted Decia and Ryan (1985) to produce a second sub theory of SDT called Organismic Integration Theory (OIT) Which details the different kinds of extrinsic motivations and the contexts in which they come about. It is the context of such motivations that concerns the SDT theory as these contexts effect whether the motivations are internalised and so integrated into the sense of self. OIT describes four different types of extrinsic motivations that often vary in terms of autonomy Externally regulated behaviour: Is the least autonomous, it is performed because of external demand or possible reward. Such actions can be seen to have an externally perceived locus of control (deCharms 1968) Introjected Regulation: of behaviour describes taking on regulations to behaviour but not fully accepting said regulations as your own. Deci and Ryan 1995 claim such behaviour normally represents regulation by contingent self esteem. Citing ego involvement as a classic form of introjections (deci and ryan 2000). This is the kind of behaviour where people feel motivated to demonstrate ability to maintain self worth. While this is internally driven Deci and Ryan (2000) say introjections behaviour are on an externally perceived locus of control because they aren’t perceived as part of self Regulation through identification: Is a more autonomy kind of extrinsic motivation. If involves consciously valuing a goal or regulation so that said action is accepted as personally important Integrated Regulation: Is the most autonomous kind of extrinsic motivation. Occurring when regulations are fully assimilated with self so they are included in persons self evaluations and beliefs on personal needs. Because of this integrated motivations share qualities with intrinsic motivations, but are still classified as extrinsic because they are does to achieve extrinsic goals not for intrinsic enjoyment.

Extrinsic motivated behaviours can be integrated into self. OIT proposes internalization is more likely to occur when there is a sense of relatedness Ryan Stiller and Lynch 1994 found children will internalize schools extrinsic regulations when they felt secure and cared for by parents and teachers Internalization of extrinsic motivation is also linked to competence. OIT suggests that feelings of competence in activities should facilitate internalization of said actions. (Vallerand 1997) Autonomy is particularly important when its regulations hare trying to be integrated into a persons sense of self. If an external context allows a person to integrate regulations they must feel competent related and autonomous, they must understand in terms of their other goals the regulation in order for a sense of autonomy to be facilitated. (Kuhl and Fuhrmann 1998). This was supported by Deci Eghrari Patrick and Leone 1994 who found in laboratory settings if person was given a meaningful reason for uninteresting behaviour along with support for their sense of autonomy and relatedness they internalized and intergraded the behaviour

Basic Needs and Intrinsic Motivations (White(1959) and deCharms 1968 proposed that the competence and autonomy needs are the basis for intrinsic motivation’s and behaviour. That here is a link between peoples basic needs and their motivations. Autonomy Deci 1971 found that offering people extrinsic rewards for behaviour that is intrinsically motivated undermined the intrinsic motivation as they grow les interested in it. Initially intrinsically motive behaviour becomes controlled by external rewards which undermines their autonomy. Further research by Amabile, DeJong and Lepper 1976 found other external factors like deadlines which restrict and control one also decrease ones intrinsic motivation. Situations that give autonomy as opposed to taking it away also have a similar link to motivation.  Studies looking at choice have found that increasing a participants options and choices increases their intrinsic motivation to said activities. (Zuckerman Porac Lathin, Smith and Deci 1978) Competence Deci 1971 found giving people positive feedback on a task increases people intrinsic motivaio to do it, interpreting this meaning that this was because the positive feedback was fulfilling peoples need for competence. Vallerand Reid 1984 found negative feedback has the opposite effect decreasing intrinsic motivation by taking away from peoples need for competence. Relatedness Frodi Bridges and Grolnick 1985 said that need for relatedness supports intrinsic motivation in a less key way. Individual Differeces SDT believes that needs are learnt and so some people will develop stronger needs than others creating individual differences. However individual differences within the theory focus on concepts resulting from the degree which needs have been satisfied or not satisfied Within SDT there are two general individual difference concepts, Causality Orientations and Life Goals Causality Orientations Are motivational orientations that refer to either the way people orient to an environment and regulate their behaviour because of this or the extent to which they are self determined in general across many settings. SDT created three orientations autonomous, controlled and impersonal. Autonomous Orientations: result from satisfaction of the basic needs Strong controlled orientations: Result from satisfaction of competence and relatedness needs but not f autonomy. And is linked to regulation through internal and external contingences. Which lead to rigid functioning and diminished well being Impersonal Orientations: Results from failing to fulfil all three needs. This is also related to poor functioning and ill being. According to the theory people have some amount of each of the orientations which can be used to make predictions on a persons psychological health and behavioural outcomes Life Goals Life goals are long term goals people use to guide their activities and they fall into two categories. Intrinsic aspirations and extrinsic aspirations. (Kasser and Ryan 1996). Intrinsic Aspirations: Contain life goals like affiliation generativity and personal development Extrinsic Aspirations: Have life goals like wealth, fame and attractiveness There have been several studies on this subject hat chart intrinsic goals being associated with greater health, well being and performance (Vansteenkiste, Simons Lens Sheldon Deci 2004)

Reference List Amabile, T. M., DeJong, W., & Lepper, M. (1976). Effects of externally imposed deadlines	on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 92-98.

Baumeister, R., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal	attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497	529.

Chirkov, V., Ryan, R. M., Kim, Y., & Kaplan, U. (2003). Differentiating autonomy from	individualism and independence: A self-determination perspective on internalization	of cultural orientations, gender and well being. Journal of Personality and Social	Psychology, 84, 97-110. Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of	Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 105-115. Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and sef-determinaton in human	behaviour. New York: Pienum. Deci, E. L., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B. C., & Leone, D. R. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The	self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality, 62, 119-142.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human autonomy: The basis for true self-esteem. In M. Kemis (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 31-49). New York: Plenum.

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. deCharms, R. (1968). Personal causation. New York: Academic Press. Frodi, A., Bridges, L., & Grolnick, W. S. (1985). Correlates of mastery-related behaviour: A	short term longitudinal study of infant in their second year. Child Development, 56,	1291-1298. Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with childrens self	regulation and competence in schools. Journal of Eductional Psychology, 81, 143	154. Harter, S. (1978). Effectance motivation reconsidered: Toward a developmental model. Human Development, 1, 661-669.

Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). Further examining the American dream: differential	correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,	22, 280-287. Kuhl, J., & Fuhrmann, A. (1998). Decomposing self-regulation and selfcontrol. In J. Heckhausen & C. Dweck (Eds.), Motivation and selfregulationacross the life-span		(pp. 15-49), New York: Cambridge University Press.

Reis, H. T. (1994). Domains of experience: Investigating relationship processes from three	perspectives. In R. Erber & R. Gilmour (Eds.), Theoretical fromeworks for personal	relationships (pp. 87-110). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Reeve, J. (1996). Motivating others. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &Bacon.

Ryan, R. M., Stiller, J., & Lynch, J. H. (1994). Representations of relationships to teachers,	parents, and friends as predictors of academic motivation and self-esteem. Journal of	Early Adolescence, 14, 226-249.

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. White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological	Review, 66, 297-333. White, R. W. (1963). Ego and reality in psychoanalytic theory. New York: International Universities Press.

Vallerand, R. J., & Reid, G. (1984). On the causal effects of perceived competence on intrinsic motivation: A test of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Sport Psychology, 6, 94-102.

Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In	M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 29, pp. 271	360). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2003). Motivation	persistence, deep level learning and achievement: The synergistic role of intrinsic	goal	content and autonomy-supportive context. Unpublished manuscript,	Deparment of	Psychology, University of Leuven. Zuckerman, M., Porac, J., Lathin, D., Smith, R., & Deci, E. L. (1978). On the importance of	self-determination for intrinsically motivated behaviour. Personality and Social	Psychology Bulletin, 4, 443-446.