Motivation and Emotion

, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp 359–373 | Cite as

Relationship autonomy and support provision in romantic relationships

  • Benjamin W. HaddenEmail author
  • Lindsey M. Rodriguez
  • C. Raymond Knee
  • Ben Porter
Original Paper


Researchers have recently argued that SDT is a fundamental theory of relationship functioning and development. Specifically, prior research has proposed that self-determined motivations to be in one’s relationship—known as relationship autonomy—are associated with more adaptive relationship functioning. While empirical research has explored the association between relationship autonomy and defensiveness, the link with pro-partner behaviors such as support provision has received relatively little attention. The present research tested, across three studies, whether relationship autonomy is associated with more care for one’s partner. Three studies—one cross-sectional, one diary, and one dyadic study—suggest that relationship autonomy is associated with overall supportiveness both in the form of secure base support and basic psychological need support. Additionally, relationship autonomy was associated with less intrusiveness, suggesting that higher relationship autonomy is not simply associated with hyper-vigilance and being overbearing, but rather attention to the partner’s needs.


Self-determination theory Relationship autonomy Close relationships Support provision 


  1. Blais, M. R., Sabourin, S., Boucher, C., & Vallerand, R. (1990). Toward a motivational model of couple happiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1021–1031. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.59.5.1021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brunell, A. B., & Webster, G. D. (2013). Self-determination and sexual experience in dating relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 970–987. doi: 10.1177/0146167213485442.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Crocker, J., & Canevello, A. (2008). Creating and undermining social support in communal relationships: The role of compassionate and self-image goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 555–575. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.95.3.555.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cutrona, C. E., Hessling, R. M., & Suhr, J. A. (1997). The influence of husband and wife personality on marital social support interactions. Personal Relationships, 4, 379–393. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1997.tb00152.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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, 313–327. doi: 10.1037/t02175-000.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human autonomy: The basis for true self-esteem. In M. H. Kernis (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 31–49). New York, NY: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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, 227–268. doi: 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49, 182–185. doi: 10.1037/a0012801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2014). Autonomy and need satisfaction in close relationships: Relationships Motivation Theory. In N. Weinstein (Ed.), Human motivation and interpersonal relationships (pp. 53–73). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Feeney, B. C. (2004). A secure base: Responsive support of goal strivings and exploration in adult intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 631–648. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.631.
  12. Feeney, B. C., & Collins, N. L. (2014). A new look at social support: A theoretical perspective on thriving through relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review. doi: 10.1177/1088868314544222
  13. Feeney, B. C., & Thrush, R. L. (2010). Relationship influences on exploration in adulthood: The characteristics and function of a secure base. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 57–76. doi: 10.1037/a0016961.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Gagné, M. (2003). The role of autonomy support and autonomy orientation in prosocial behavior engagement. Motivation & Emotion, 27, 199–223. doi: 10.1023/A:1025007614869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gagné, M., Ryan, R. M., & Bargmann, K. (2003). Autonomy support and need satisfaction in the motivation and well-being of gymnasts. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 15, 372–390. doi: 10.1080/714044203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gaine, G. S., & La Guardia, J. G. (2009). The unique contributions of motivations to maintain a relationship and motivations toward relational activities to relationship well-being. Motivation and Emotion, 33, 184–202. doi: 10.1007/s11031-009-9120-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with children’s self-regulation and competence in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 143–154. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.81.2.143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hadden, B. W., Øverup, C. S., & Knee, C. R. (2014). Removing the ego: Need fulfillment, self-image goals, and self-presentation. Self and Identity, 13, 274–293. doi: 10.1080/15298868.2013.815398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1994). Attachment as an organizational framework for research on close relationships. Psychological Inquiry, 5, 1–22. doi: 10.1207/s15327965pli0501_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heppner, W. L., Kernis, M. H., Nezlek, J. B., Foster, J., Lakey, C. E., & Goldman, B. M. (2008). Within-person relationships among daily self-esteem, need satisfaction, and authenticity. Psychological Science, 19, 1140–1145. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02215.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Hodgins, H. S., & Knee, C. R. (2002). The integrating self and conscious experience. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 87–100). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.Google Scholar
  22. Hodgins, H. S., Koestner, R., & Duncan, N. (1996). On the compatibility of autonomy and relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 227–237. doi: 10.1177/0146167296223001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hodgins, H. S., & Liebeskind, E. (2003). Apology versus defense: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 297–316. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00024-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hui, C. M., Molden, D. C., & Finkel, E. J. (2013). Loving freedom: Concerns with promotion or prevention and the role of autonomy in relationship well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 61–85. doi: 10.1037/a0032503.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence (p. 341). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  26. Kenny, D. A. (1996). Models of non-independence in dyadic research. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 13, 279–294. doi: 10.1177/0265407596132007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis (1st ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  28. Kim, Y., Carver, C. S., Deci, E. L., & Kasser, T. (2008). Adult attachment and psychological well-being in cancer caregivers: The meditational role of spouses’ motives for caregiving. Health Psychology, 27, S144–S154. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.27.2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Knee, C., Canevello, A., Bush, A. L., & Cook, A. (2008). Relationship-contingent self-esteem and the ups and downs of romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 608–627. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.95.3.608.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Knee, C. R., Hadden, B. W., Porter, B. W., & Rodriguez, L. M. (2013). Self-determination theory and romantic relationship processes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 307–324. doi: 10.1177/1088868313498000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Knee, C. R., Lonsbary, C., Canevello, A., & Patrick, H. (2005). Self-determination and conflict in romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 997–1009. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.997.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Knee, C. R., Patrick, H., Vietor, N. A., Nanayakkara, A., & Neighbors, C. (2002). Self-determination as growth motivation in romantic relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 609–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Knee, C. R., & Zuckerman, M. (1996). Causality orientations and the disappearance of the self-serving bias. Journal of Research in Personality, 30, 76–87. doi: 10.1006/jrpe.1996.0005.
  34. Knee, C. R., & Zuckerman, M. (1998). A nondefensive personality: Autonomy and control as moderators of defensive coping and self-handicapping. Journal of Research in Personality, 32, 115–130. doi: 10.1006/jrpe.1997.2207.
  35. Koestner, R., Gingras, I., Abutaa, R., Losier, G. F., DiDio, L., & Gagné, M. (1999). To follow expert advice when making a decision: An examination of reactive versus reflective autonomy. Journal of Personality, 67, 851–872. doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.00075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Koestner, R., & Losier, G. F. (1996). Distinguishing reactive versus reflective autonomy. Journal of Personality, 64, 465–494. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1996.tb00518.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. La Guardia, J. G., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Within-person variation in security of attachment: A self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 367–384. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.79.3.367.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Laurenceau, J., Rivera, L. M., Schaffer, A. R., & Pietromonaco, P. R. (2004). Intimacy as an Interpersonal Process: Current Status and Future Directions. In D. J. Mashek & A. P. Aron (Eds.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy (pp. 61–78). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
  39. Patrick, H., Knee, C. R., Canevello, A., & Lonsbary, C. (2007). The role of need fulfillment in relationship functioning and well-being: A self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 434–457. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.3.434.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Pavey, L., Greitemeyer, T., & Sparks, P. (2011). Highlighting relatedness promotes prosocial motives and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 905–917. doi: 10.1177/0146167211405994.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Pelletier, L. G., Levesque, C. S., & Legault, L. (2002). Pressure from above and pressure from below as determinants of teachers’ motivation and teaching behavior. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 186–196. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Reis, H. T., Clark, M. S., & Holmes, J. G. (2004a). Perceived Partner Responsiveness as an Organizing Construct in the Study of Intimacy and Closeness. In D. J. Mashek & A. P. Aron (Eds.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy (pp. 201–225). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
  43. Reis, H. T., Clark, M. S., & Holmes, J. G. (2004b). Perceived partner responsiveness as an organizing construct in the study of closeness and intimacy. In D. J. Mashek & A. Aron (Eds.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy (pp. 201–225). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  44. Reis, H. T., & Shaver, P. (1988). Intimacy as an interpersonal process. In S. Duck, D. F. Hay, S. E. Hobfoll, W. Ickes, & B. M. Montgomery (Eds.), Handbook of personal relationships: Theory, research and interventions (pp. 367–389). Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  45. 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, 419–435. doi: 10.1177/0146167200266002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Roth, G., Assor, A., Kanat-Maymon, Y., & Kaplan, H. (2007). Autonomous motivation for teaching: How self-determined teaching may lead to self-determined learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 761–774. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rusbult, C. E., Martz, J. M., & Agnew, C. R. (1998). The Investment Model Scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357–391. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Soenens, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2005). Antecedents and outcomes of self-determination in three life domains: The role of parents’ and teachers’ autonomy support. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34, 589–604. doi: 10.1007/s10964-005-8948-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Taylor, I. M., & Ntoumanis, N. (2007). Teacher motivational strategies and student self-determination in physical education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 747–760. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Taylor, I. M., Ntoumanis, N., & Standage, M. (2008). A self-determination theory approach to understanding the antecedents of teachers’ motivational strategies in physical education. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 30, 75–94.Google Scholar
  52. Uysal, A., Lin, H. L., & Knee, C. R. (2010). The role of need satisfaction in self-concealmentvand well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 187–199. doi: 10.1177/0146167209354518.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 271–360). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60019-2.Google Scholar
  54. Weinstein, N., DeHaan, C. R., & Ryan, R. M. (2010a). Attributing autonomous versus introjected motivation to helpers and the recipient experience: Effects on gratitude, attitudes, and well-being. Motivation and Emotion, 34, 418–431. doi: 10.1007/s11031-010-9183-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Weinstein, N., Hodgins, H. S., & Ryan, R. M. (2010b). Autonomy and control in dyads: Effects on interaction quality and joint creative performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1603–1617. doi: 10.1177/0146167210386385.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). When helping helps: Autonomous motivation for prosocial behavior and its influence on well-being for the helper and recipient. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 222–244. doi: 10.1037/a0016984.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Wieselquist, J., Rusbult, C. E., Foster, C. A., & Agnew, C. R. (1999). Commitment, pro-relationship behavior, and trust in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 942–966. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.942.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Benjamin W. Hadden
    • 1
    Email author
  • Lindsey M. Rodriguez
    • 1
  • C. Raymond Knee
    • 1
  • Ben Porter
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations