Advertisement

Motivation and Emotion

, Volume 40, Issue 6, pp 781–813 | Cite as

Performance, incentives, and needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness: a meta-analysis

  • Christopher P. CerasoliEmail author
  • Jessica M. Nicklin
  • Alexander S. Nassrelgrgawi
Original Paper

Abstract

Although self-determination theory (SDT) is one of the most widely cited theories of human motivation and function, critics have questioned the practical utility of its three needs (i.e., autonomy, competence, and relatedness) in performance contexts. We conduct a meta-analysis (k = 108, N = 30,648) to explore the magnitude and boundary conditions of need satisfaction and performance. As expected, autonomy (ρ = .28), competence (ρ = .37), and relatedness (ρ = .25) predict performance. Incentivization per se has little impact on need-satisfaction: instead, the need satisfaction → performance relationship is moderated by incentive salience. Consistent with a crowding-out hypothesis, need satisfaction matters less to performance when incentives are directly salient (ρ = .22) and more when indirectly salient (ρ = .45). Our meta-analysis demonstrates that indirectly salient incentives and need-satisfaction are indeed compatible, providing a direct response to criticisms of SDT in performance contexts. Additional unexpected findings and future directions are discussed.

Keywords

Productivity Academic achievement Literature review Employee motivation Rewards 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Christopher P. Cerasoli and Alexander S. Nassrelgrgawi declare that they have no conflicts of interest. Jessica M. Nicklin declares that she has no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

(asterisks indicate studies included in analyses)

  1. *Abuhamdeh, S., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Jalal, B. (2015). Enjoying the possibility of defeat: Outcome uncertainty, suspense, and intrinsic motivation. Motivation & Emotion, 39, 1–10. doi: 10.1007/s11031-014-9425-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. *Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M., Van den Berghe, L., De Meyer, J., & Haerens, L. (2014). Fostering a need-supportive teaching style: Intervention effects on physical education teachers’ beliefs and teaching behaviors. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 36, 595–609. doi: 10.1123/jsep.2013-0229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aguinis, H., Pierce, C. A., Bosco, F. A., Dalton, D. R., & Dalton, C. M. (2011). Debunking myths and urban legends about meta-analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 14, 306–331. doi: 10.1177/1094428110375720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alderfer, C. P. (1969). An empirical test of a new theory of human needs. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 143–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. *Almagro, B. J., Conde, C., Moreno, J. A., & Saenz-Lopez, P. (2009). Analysis and comparison of adolescent athletes’ motivation: Basketball players vs. Football players. Revista de Psicologia del Deporte, 18, 353–356.Google Scholar
  6. *Amorose, A. J., & Anderson-Butcher, D. (2015). Exploring the independent and interactive effects of autonomy-supportive and controlling coaching behaviors on adolescent athletes’ motivation for sport. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 4(3), 206–218. doi: 10.1037/spy0000038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. *Amoura, C., Berjot, S., Gillet, N., Caruana, S., Cohen, J., & Finez, L. (2015). Autonomy-supportive and controlling styles of teaching: Opposite or distinct teaching styles? Swiss Journal of Psychology, 74, 141–158. doi: 10.1024/1421-0185/a000156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. *Anderman, E. M., & Midgley, C. (1997). Changes in achievement goal orientations, perceived academic competence, and grades across the transition to middle-level schools. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 269–298. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1996.0926.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. *Arkes, H. R. (1979). Competence and the overjustification effect. Motivation and Emotion, 3, 143–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. *Arnold, H. J. (1985). Task performance, perceived competence, and attributed causes of performance as determinants of intrinsic motivation. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 876–888. doi: 10.2307/256242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 267–285. doi: 10.1002/job.138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64, 359–372. doi: 10.1037/h0043445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. *Avila, L. T., Chiviacowsky, S., Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2012). Positive social comparative feedback enhances motor learning in children. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13, 849–853. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.07.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. *Axler, M. S. (2009). Achievement goals and academic internalization: The role of perceived autonomy support, perceived academic competence, gender and grade level in influencing academic motivation and performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. State University of New York, University at Albany.Google Scholar
  15. *Baard, P. P., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Intrinsic need satisfaction: A motivational basis of performance and well-being in two work settings. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 2045–2068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. *Baena-Extremera, A., Gomez-Lopez, M., Granero-Gallegos, A., & del Mar Ortiz-Camacho, M. (2015). Predicting satisfaction in physical education from motivational climate and self-determined motivation. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 34, 210–224. doi: 10.1123/jtpe.2013-0165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  18. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. *Barkoukis, V., & Hagger, M. S. (2013). The trans-contextual model: Perceived learning and performance motivational climates as analogues of perceived autonomy support. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28, 353–372. doi: 10.1007/s10212-012-0118-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. *Becker, D. A. A. (1993). The effects of audit decision aid design on the intrinsic motivation and performance of auditors predicting corporate bankruptcy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Wisconsin, Madison.Google Scholar
  21. *Beiser, M., Sack, W., Manson, S. M., Redshirt, R., & Dion, R. (1998). Mental health and the academic performance of first nations and majority-culture children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68, 455–467. doi: 10.1037/h0080355.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. *Bembenutty, H., & White, M. C. (2013). Academic performance and satisfaction with homework completion among college students. Learning and Individual Differences, 24, 83–88. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2012.10.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. *Bodla, M. A., & Naeem, B. (2014). Creativity as mediator for intrinsic motivation and sales performance. Creativity Research Journal, 26, 468–473. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2014.961783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Boggiano, A. K. (1998). Maladaptive achievement patterns: A test of a diathesis–stress analysis of helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1681.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. *Boggiano, A. K., & Ruble, D. N. (1979). Competence and the overjustification effect: A developmental study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1462–1468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. *Boggiano, A. K., Ruble, D. N., & Pittman, T. S. (1982). The mastery hypothesis and the overjustification effect. Social Cognition, 1, 38–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Bowlby, J. (1958). The nature of a child’s tie to his mother. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 99, 265–272.Google Scholar
  28. *Bouchey, H. A., & Harter, S. (2005). Reflected appraisals, academic self-perceptions, and math/science performance during early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 673–686. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.97.4.673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. *Bouffard, T., Markovits, H., Vezeau, C., Boisvert, M., & Dumas, C. (1998). The relation between accuracy of self-perception and cognitive development. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 321–330. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1998.tb01294.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. *Brien, M., Hass, C., & Savoie, A. (2012). Psychological health as a mediator between need satisfaction at work and teachers’ self-perceptions of performance. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 44, 288–299. doi: 10.1037/a0028056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2014). American time use survey. United States Department of Labor. Retrieved January 15, 2015 from http://www.bls.gov/tus/charts/
  32. *Burkhalter, N. A. (1998). An analysis of the effects of alienation from physical education and perceived physical competence on physical fitness levels of middle school children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Houston.Google Scholar
  33. *Burleigh, D. L. (1976). General self-esteem, self-perceived competence for task at hand, expectations of others and task performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. State University of New York, University at Buffalo.Google Scholar
  34. Campbell, J. P., McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H., & Sager, C. E. (1993). A theory of performance. In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel Selection (pp. 35–70). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  35. *Carpentier, J., & Mageau, G. A. (2013). When change-oriented feedback enhances motivation, well-being and performance: A look at autonomy-supportive feedback in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14, 423–435. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1981). Attention and self-regulation. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Cascio, W. F., & Aguinis, H. (2008). Research in industrial and organizational psychology from 1963 to 2007: Changes, choices, and trends. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1062–1081. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.1062.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. *Cassidy, T., & Giles, M. (2009). Achievement motivation, problem-solving style, and performance in higher education. The Irish Journal of Psychology, 30, 211–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Cerasoli, C. P., & Ford, M. T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation, performance, and the mediating role of mastery goal orientation: A test of self-determination theory. The Journal of Psychology, 148, 267–286.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Cerasoli, C. P., Nicklin, J. M., & Ford, M. T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 980–1008. doi: 10.1037/a0035661.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. *Cho, Y. (2006). Perceived competence and autonomy as moderators of the effects of achievement goal orientations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  42. *Cho, Y., Weinstein, C. E., & Wicker, F. (2011). Perceived competence and autonomy as moderators of the effects of achievement goal orientations. Educational Psychology, 31, 393–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. *Choi, J. N. (2012). Context and creativity: The theory of planned behavior as an alternative mechanism. Social Behavior and Personality, 40, 681–692. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2012.40.4.681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64, 89–136. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01203.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Cohen, P., Cohen, J., Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1999). The problem of units and the circumstance for POMP. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 34, 315–346. doi: 10.1207/S15327906MBR3403_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. *Collins, B. J. (2010). Invited reaction: Investigating the influences of core self-evaluations, job autonomy, and intrinsic motivation on in-role job performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21, 373–379. doi: 10.1002/hrdq.20058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Cooper, H. (2003). Editorial. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 3–9. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. *Corrigan, M. L. (1998). Employee involvement, psychological empowerment and job performance in an applied setting. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. San Diego: California School of Professional Psychology.Google Scholar
  49. Cortina, J. M. (2003). Apples and Oranges (and Pears, Oh My!): The Search for Moderators in Meta-Analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 415–439. doi: 10.1177/1094428103257358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Cortina, J. M., & Landis, R. S. (2009). When small effect sizes tell a big story, and when large effect sizes don’t. In E. E. Lance & R. J. Vandenberg (Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity, and fable in the organizational and social sciences (pp. 287–308). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Cropanzano, R., & Wright, T. A. (2001). When a “happy” worker is really a “productive” worker: A review and further refinement of the happy-productive worker thesis. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53, 182–199. doi: 10.1037//1061-4087.53.3.182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Deci, E. L. (1972). The effects of contingent and noncontingent rewards and controls on intrinsic motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 8, 217–229. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(72)90047-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Self-determination in a work organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 580–590. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.74.4.580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 109–134. doi: 10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1024–1037. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.53.6.1024.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 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
  58. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). The undermining effect is a reality after all: Extrinsic rewards, task interest, and self-determination: Reply to Eisenberger, Pierce, and Cameron (1999) and Lepper, Henderlong, and Gingras (1999). Psychological Bulletin, 125, 627–700. doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.125.6.692.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., Gagné, M., Leone, D. R., Usunov, J., & Kornazheva, B. P. (2001). Need satisfaction, motivation, and well-being in the work organizations of a former Eastern Bloc country. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 930–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., & Williams, G. C. (1995). Need satisfaction and the self-regulation of learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 165–183. doi: 10.1016/S1041-6080(96)90013-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Dipboye, R. L. (1990). Laboratory vs. field research in industrial and organizational psychology. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5, 1–34.Google Scholar
  62. *Dinger, F. C., Dickhauser, O., Spinath, B., & Steinmayr, R. (2013). Antecedents and consequences of students’ achievement goals: A mediation analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 28, 90–101. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.09.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. *Dodd, N. G., & Ganster, D. C. (1996). The interactive effects of variety, autonomy, and feedback on attitudes and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 329–347. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199607)17:4%3C329::AID-JOB754%3E3.0.CO;2-B.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Donovan, J. (2001). Work motivation. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work, and organizational psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 53–76). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  65. *Dysvik, A., & Kuvaas, B. (2011). Intrinsic motivation as a moderator on the relationship between perceived job autonomy and work performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20, 367–387. doi: 10.1080/13594321003590630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. *Eisenberger, R., Rhoades, L., & Cameron, J. (1999). Does pay for performance increase or decrease perceived self-determination and intrinsic motivation? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1026–1040. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.77.5.1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Elliot, A. J., & Dweck, C. S. (2005). Handbook of competence and motivation. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  68. *Elmadag, A. B. (2007). Managing frontline service employee motivation: Influences on work-related outcomes and customer experiences. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Alabama.Google Scholar
  69. Erez, A., Bloom, M. C., & Wells, M. T. (1996). Using random rather than fixed effects models in meta-analysis: Implications for situational specificity and validity generalization. Personnel Psychology, 49, 275–306. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01801.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Eysenck, H. J. (1994). Meta-analysis and its problems. British Medical Journal, 309, 789–792.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. *Felton, L., & Jowett, S. (2013). “What do coaches do” and “how do they relate”: Their effects on athletes’ psychological needs and functioning. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 23, e130–e139. doi: 10.1111/sms.12029.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Fisher, C. D. (1978). The effects of personal control, competence, and extrinsic reward systems on intrinsic motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 21, 273–288. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(78)90054-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. *Forbes, J. B., & Barrett, G. V. (1978). Individual abilities and task demands in relation to performance and satisfaction on two repetitive monitoring tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 188–196. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.63.2.188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Ford, M. T., Cerasoli, C. P., Higgins, J. A., & Decesare, A. L. (2011). Relationships between psychological, physical, and behavioural health and work performance: A review and meta-analysis. Work & Stress, 25, 185–204. doi: 10.1080/02678373.2011.609035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. *Fortier, M. S., Vallerand, R. J., & Guay, F. (1995). Academic motivation and school performance: Toward a structural model. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 257–274. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1995.1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. *Freedman, S. M., & Phillips, J. S. (1985). The effects of situational performance constraints on intrinsic motivation and satisfaction: The role of perceived competence and self-determination. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35, 397–416. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(85)90030-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Frey, B. S., & Oberholzer-Gee, F. (1997). The cost of price incentives: An empirical analysis of motivation crowding-out. The American Economic Review, 87, 746–755.Google Scholar
  78. Frey, B. S., & Osterloh, M. (2005). Yes, managers should be paid like bureaucrats. Journal of Management Inquiry, 14, 96–111. doi: 10.1177/1056492604273757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Gajendran, R. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2007). The good, the bad, and the unknown about telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1524–1541. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1524.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Gallup, Incorporated. (2013). State of the American workplace. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved January 19, 2015 from http://www.gallup.com/services/178514/state-american-workplace.aspx
  81. *Gao, Z. (2008). Perceived competence and enjoyment in predicting students’ physical activity and cardiorespiratory fitness. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 107, 365–372. doi: 10.2466/PMS.107.6.365-372.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Gagné, M. (2003). The role of autonomy support and autonomy orientation in prosocial behavior engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 199–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Gagné, M., & Forest, J. (2008). The study of compensation systems through the lens of self-determination theory: Reconciling 35 years of debate. Canadian Psychology, 49, 225–232. doi: 10.1037/a0012757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Gagne, 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. *Gardner, B., & Lally, P. (2013). Does intrinsic motivation strengthen physical activity habit? Modeling relationships between self-determination, past behaviour, and habit strength. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 36, 488–497. doi: 10.1007/s10865-012-9442-0.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Gottfried, A. E. (1990). Academic intrinsic motivation in young elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 525–538. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.82.3.525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Greenberg, J. (1987). The college sophomore as guinea pig: Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12, 157–159. doi: 10.5465/AMR.1987.4306516.Google Scholar
  89. *Greguras, G. J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009a). Different fits satisfy different needs: Linking person-environment fit to employee commitment and performance using self-determination theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 465–477. doi: 10.1037/a0014068.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. *Gillet, N., Berjot, S., & Gobancé, L. (2009). A motivational model of performance in the sport domain. European Journal of Sport Science, 9, 151–158. doi: 10.1080/17461390902736793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. *Gillet, N., Vallerand, R. J., Amoura, S., & Baldes, B. (2010). Influence of coaches’ autonomy support on athletes’ motivation and sport performance: A test of the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11, 155–161. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.10.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Gilliland, S. W., & Landis, R. S. (1992). Quality and quantity goals in a complex decision task: Strategies and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 672–681. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.77.5.672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. *Goudas, M., Biddle, S., & Underwood, M. (1995). A prospective study of the relationships between motivational orientations and perceived competence with intrinsic motivation and achievement in a teacher education course. Educational Psychology, 15, 89–96. doi: 10.1080/0144341950150108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Graham, S. (1994). Motivation in African Americans. Review of Educational Research, 64, 55–117. doi: 10.3102/00346543064001055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Grant, A. M. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 48–58. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. *Greguras, G. J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009b). Different fits satisfy different needs: Linking person-environment fit to employee commitment and performance using self-determination theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 465–477. doi: 10.1037/a0014068.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. *Grolnick, W. S., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1991). Inner resources for school achievement: Motivational mediators of children’s perceptions of their parents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 508–517. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.83.4.508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. *Grolnick, W. S., & Slowiaczek, M. L. (1994). Parents’ involvement in children’s schooling: A multidimensional conceptualization and motivational model. Child Development, 65, 237–252.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Guion, R. M. (1998). Assessment, measurement, and prediction for personnel decisions. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  100. Guisinger, S., & Blatt, S. J. (1994). Individuality and relatedness: Evolution of a fundamental dialectic. American Psychologist, 49, 104–111. doi: 10.1037//0003-066X.49.2.104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. *Hackman, J. R., & Lawler, E. E. (1971). Employee reactions to job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55, 259–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250–279. doi: 10.1037/h0031152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. *Halvari, H., Ulstad, S. O., Bagoien, T. E., & Skjesol, K. (2009). Autonomy support and its links to physical activity and competitive performance: Mediations through motivation, competence, action orientation and harmonious passion, and the moderator role of autonomy support by perceived competence. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 53, 533–555. doi: 10.1080/00313830903302059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. *Hanze, M., & Berger, R. (2007). Cooperative learning, motivational effects, and student characteristics: An experimental study comparing cooperative learning and direct instruction in 12th grade physics classes. Learning and Instruction, 17, 29–41. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.11.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. *Harackiewicz, J. M., & Manderlink, G. (1984). A process analysis of the effects of performance-contingent rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 531–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Harlow, H. F. (1958). The nature of love. American Psychologist, 13, 673–685. doi: 10.1037/h0047884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. *Harris, M. D., Tetrick, L. E., & Tiegs, R. B. (1993). Cognitive ability and motivational interventions: Their effects on performance outcomes. Current Psychology, 12, 57–65. doi: 10.1007/BF02737092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Harter, S. (1978). Effectance motivation reconsidered: Toward a developmental model. Human Development, 21, 34–64. doi: 10.1159/000271574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. *Hohn, A. M. (2001, April). Effects of survey format on perceived competence in writing: A developmental study. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American Education Research Association.Google Scholar
  110. Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  111. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. *Jelstad, B. (2007). Beyond money: Intrinsic work motivation in profit and nonprofit organizations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration.Google Scholar
  113. Jenkins, G. D., Mitra, A., Gupta, N., & Shaw, J. D. (1998). Are financial incentives related to performance? A meta-analytic review of empirical research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 777–787. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.83.5.777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. *Jeon, S. (2008). The effects of parents’ and teachers’ motivating styles on adolescents’ school outcomes and psychological well-being: A test of self-determination theory in a Korean context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Iowa.Google Scholar
  115. *Jones, J. E. (2003). Self-determination theory as a model for motivation in a training context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Oklahoma.Google Scholar
  116. Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 376–407. doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.127.3.376.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. *Kalbers, L. P., & Cenker, W. J. (2008). The impact of exercised responsibility, experience, autonomy, and role ambiguity on job performance in public accounting. Journal of Managerial Issues, 20, 327–347.Google Scholar
  118. Kane, J. S. (1997). Assessment of the situational and individual components of components of job performance. Human Performance, 10, 193–226. doi: 10.1207/s15327043hup1003_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. *Karatepe, O. M., & Aleshinloye, K. D. (2009). Emotional dissonance and emotional exhaustion among hotel employees in Nigeria. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28, 349–358. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.12.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 681–706. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.65.4.681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1996). Further examining the American dream: Differential correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 280–287. doi: 10.1177/0146167296223006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Klehe, U. C., & Anderson, N. (2007). Working hard and working smart: Motivation and ability during typical and maximum performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 978–992.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). Effects of feedback intervention on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284. doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.119.2.254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. *Kuvaas, B. (2009). A test of hypotheses derived from self-determination theory among public sector employees. Employee Relations, 31, 39–56. doi: 10.1108/01425450910916814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. *Kwok, D. C. (1995). The self-perception of competence by Canadian and Chinese children. Psychologia: An International Journal of Psychology in the Orient, 38, 9–16.Google Scholar
  126. LaGuardia, 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. LaGuardia, J. G., & Patrick, H. (2008). Self-determination theory as a fundamental theory of close relationships. Canadian Psychology, 49, 201–209. doi: 10.1037/a0012760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. *Lam, S. S., & Schaubroeck, J. (2000). The role of locus of control in reactions to being promoted and to being passed over: A quasi experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 66–78. doi: 10.2307/1556386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. *Langdon, J. (2010). Teacher behaviors, student motivation, and learning in the domains of physical education. Published Doctoral dissertation retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (Order No. 3402793)Google Scholar
  130. Leone, D. R. (1995). The relation of work climate, higher order need satisfaction, need salience, and causality orientations to work engagement, psychological adjustment, and job satisfaction (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Rochester, 1995). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56, 2917B.Google Scholar
  131. Lepper, M. R., Henderlong, J., & Gingras, I. (1999). Understanding the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation—uses and abuses of meta-analysis: Comment on Deci, Koestner, and Ryan (1999). Psychological Bulletin, 124, 669–676. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. *Leroy, H., Anseel, F., Gardner, W. L., & Sels, L. (2015). Authentic leadership, authentic followership, basic need satisfaction, and work role performance: A cross-level study. Journal of Management, 41, 1677–1697. doi: 10.1177/0149206312457822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. *Li, F., Li, Y., & Wang, E. (2009). Task characteristics and team performance: The mediating effect of team member satisfaction. Social Behavior and Personality, 37, 1373–1382. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2009.37.10.1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. *Li, W., Lee, A. M., & Solmon, M. A. (2005). Relationships among dispositional ability conceptions, intrinsic motivation, perceived competence, experience, persistence, and performance. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 24, 51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). Core findings. In E. A. Locke & G. P. Latham (Eds.), A theory of goal setting and task performance (pp. 27–62). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  136. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57, 705–717. doi: 10.1037//0003-066X.57.9.705.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. *Lu, L., Lin, X., & Leung, K. (2012). Goal orientation and innovative performance: The mediating roles of knowledge sharing and perceived autonomy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, E180–E197. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.01018.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Marcus, R. F., & Sanders-Reio, J. (2001). The influence of attachment on school completion. School Psychology Quarterly, 16, 427–444. doi: 10.1521/scpq.16.4.427.19894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Martin, B. H., & MacDonnell, R. (2012). Is telework effective for organizations? A meta-analysis of empirical research on perceptions of telework and organizational outcomes. Management Research Review, 35, 602–616. doi: 10.1108/01409171211238820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. *McEnrue, M. P. (1984). Perceived competence as a moderator of the relationship between role clarity and job performance: A test of two hypotheses. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 379–386. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(84)90044-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. McGraw, K. O. (1978). The detrimental effects of reward on performance: a literature review and a prediction model. In M. R. Lepper & D. Greene (Eds.), The hidden costs of reward (pp. 33–60). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  143. *Meigher, C. A. (2001). Factors influencing and predicting motivation to learn: An empirical analysis of two theories. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  144. Mosier, C. I. (1943). On the reliability of a weighted composite. Psychometrika, 8, 161–168. doi: 10.1007/BF02288700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Moss, E., & St-Laurent, D. (2001). Attachment at school age and academic performance. Developmental Psychology, 37, 863–874. doi: 10.1037//0012-1649.37.6.863.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. *Mouratidis, A., Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Sideridis, G. (2008). The motivating role of positive feedback in sport and physical education: Evidence for a motivational model. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 30, 240–268.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. National Research Council. (1992). Combining information: Statistical issues and opportunities for research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  148. Ng, T. W., & Feldman, D. C. (2012). Evaluating six common stereotypes about older workers with meta-analytical data. Personnel Psychology, 65, 821–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Nicklin, J. M., Cerasoli, C. P., & Dydyn, K. (2015). Telecommuting: What? Why? When? and How? In J. Lee (Ed.), The impact of ICT on work (pp. 41-70) New York: Springer. doi:  10.1007/978-981-287-612-6_3
  150. Nieminen, L. R., Nicklin, J. M., McClure, T. K., & Chakrabarti, M. (2011). Meta-analytic decisions and reliability: A serendipitous case of three independent telecommuting meta-analyses. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26, 105–121. doi: 10.1007/s10869-010-9185-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Park, S. M., & Rainey, H. G. (2008). Leadership and public service motivation in US federal agencies. International Public Management Journal, 11, 109–142. doi: 10.1080/10967490801887954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Robinson, J. C. (2008). The effects of choice on intrinsic motivation and related outcomes: A meta-analysis of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 270–300. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.270.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. *Phillips, E. D. (1997). The influence of supervisory acceptance on subordinates’ intrinsic motivation and creativity within the context of expected evaluation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Brandeis University.Google Scholar
  154. Pinder, W. C. C. (2011). Work motivation in organizational behavior (2nd ed.). New York: Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  155. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  156. Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Blume, B. D. (2009). Individual-and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 122–141. doi: 10.1037/a0013079.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. *Pohl, S., Dal Santo, L., & Battistelli, A. (2012). Perceived organizational support, job characteristics and intrinsic motivation as antecedents of organizational citizenship behaviours of nurses. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 25, 39–52.Google Scholar
  158. Porath, C., & Erez, A. (2007). Does rudeness really matter? The effects of rudeness on task performance and helpfulness. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1181–1197. doi: 10.2307/20159919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Porath, C., & Erez, A. (2009). Overlooked but not untouched: How rudeness reduces onlookers’ performance on routine and creative tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109, 29–44. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. *Pulfrey, C., Darnon, C., & Butera, F. (2013). Autonomy and task performance: Explaining the impact of grades on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 39–57. doi: 10.1037/a0029376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. Reeve, J. (2009). Understanding motivation and emotion (Vol. 5). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  162. Rich, B. L. (2006). Job engagement: Construct validation and relationships with job satisfaction, job involvement, and intrinsic motivation (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (Order No. 3228825)Google Scholar
  163. *Roche, M., & Haar, J. M. (2013). A metamodel approach towards self-determination theory: A study of New Zealand managers’ organisational citizenship behaviours. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(18), 3397–3417. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2013.770779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Rose, S. (2011). Academic success of nursing students: Does motivation matter? Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 6, 181–184. doi: 10.1016/j.teln.2011.05.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Rosenthal, R., & DiMatteo, M. R. (2001). Meta-analysis: Recent developments in quantitative methods for literature reviews. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 59–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Ross, L., & Nisbett, R. E. (1991). The person and the situation: Perspectives of social psychology: Mcgraw-Hill Book Company.Google Scholar
  167. Ross, C. E., & Sastry, J. (1999). The sense of personal control: Social-structural causes and emotional consequences. In C. S. Aneshensel & J. C. Phelan (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of mental health (pp. 369–394). New York: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  168. Ryan, R. M. (1993). Agency and organization: Intrinsic motivation, autonomy, and the self in psychological development. In J. Jacobs (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation: Developmental perspectives on motivation (Vol. 40, pp. 1–56). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  169. Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749–761. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.57.5.749.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. 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. doi: 10.1037//0003-066X.55.1.68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3–33). Rochester: University of Rochester Press.Google Scholar
  172. Ryan, R. M., & Powelson, C. L. (1991). Autonomy and relatedness as fundamental to motivation and education. Journal of Experimental Education, 60, 49–66. doi: 10.1080/00220973.1991.10806579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. *Sachs, J. (2001). A path model for adult learner feedback. Educational Psychology, 21, 267–275. doi: 10.1080/01443410120065478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Sackett, P. R., Zedeck, S., & Fogli, L. (1988). Relations between measures of typical and maximum job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 482–486. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.73.3.482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293–315. doi: 10.1108/13620430810870476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2001). Meta-analysis. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, J. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 51–70). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  177. Schmitt, M., & Dörfel, M. (1999). Procedural injustice at work, justice sensitivity, job satisfaction and psychosomatic well-being. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 443–453. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199906)29:4<443:AID-EJSP935>3.0.CO;2-C.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. *Senko, C. M. (2003). The stability and regulation of achievement goals: The role of competence feedback. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Wisconsin - Madison.Google Scholar
  179. Shadish, W. R. (1996). Meta-analysis and the exploration of causal mediating processes: A primer of examples, methods, and issues. Psychological Methods, 1, 47–65. doi: 10.1037//1082-989X.1.1.47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  180. Sheldon, K. M., Williams, G., & Joiner, T. (2008). Self-determination theory in the clinic: Motivating physical and mental health. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  181. *Sheldon, K. M., Zhaoyang, R., & Williams, M. J. (2013). Psychological need-satisfaction, and basketball performance. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14, 675–681. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.05.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  182. Silvester, J., Patterson, F., & Ferguson, E. (2003). Comparing two attributional models of job performance in retail sales: A field study. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 115–132. doi: 10.1348/096317903321208916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. Simons, T., & Roberson, Q. (2003). Why managers should care about fairness: The effects of aggregate justice perceptions on organizational outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 432–443. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.432.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  184. *Sink, C. A., Barnett, J. E., & Pool, B. A. (1993). Perceptions of scholastic competence in relation to middle-school achievement. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76, 471–478. doi: 10.2466/pms.1993.76.2.471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  185. Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  186. Smith, M. L., & Glass, G. V. (1977). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. American Psychologist, 32, 752–760. doi: 10.1037//0003-066X.32.9.752.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  187. Snyder, R. A., Williams, R. R., & Cashman, J. F. (1984). Age, tenure, and work perceptions as predictors of reactions to performance feedback. The Journal of Psychology, 116, 11–21. doi: 10.1080/00223980.1984.9923611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. *Spray, C. M., Wang, C., Biddle, S. J., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. (2006). Understanding motivation in sport: An experimental test of achievement goal and self determination theories. European Journal of Sport Science, 6, 43–51. doi: 10.1080/17461390500422879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  189. *Spurlock, H. L. (2002). The impact of student-centered pedagogy and students’ feelings of autonomy, competence, and relatedness on motivation: Implications for test motivation and test performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Howard University.Google Scholar
  190. Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240–261. doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.124.2.240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. *Stark, D. R. (1983). The relative effectiveness of personal-psychological versus personal-demographic variables in predicting salespeople’s job outcomes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Illinois Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  192. *Strain, C. R., Jr. (1999). Perceived autonomy, need for autonomy, and job performance in retail salespeople. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 14, 259–265.Google Scholar
  193. *Stringer, R. W., & Heath, N. (2006). Possible relationships between depressive symptoms and reading. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 21, 91–105. doi: 10.1177/0829573506298874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  194. Tang, S. H., & Hall, V. C. (1995). The overjustification effect: A meta-analysis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 365–404. doi: 10.1002/acp.2350090502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  195. Tannenbaum, S. I., & Cerasoli, C. P. (2013). Do team and individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 55, 231–245. doi: 10.1177/0018720812448394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  196. *Thorpe, E. R., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). A role theoretic view of product-market strategy execution: An investigation of mid-level marketing managers. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 15, 223–236. doi: 10.1080/09652540701320985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  197. *Trusty, M. L., & Macan, T. H. (1995). Personal control: Effects of reward contingency and locus of control. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 10, 201–214.Google Scholar
  198. Truxillo, D. M., Bodner, T. E., Bertolino, M., Bauer, T. N., & Yonce, C. A. (2009). Effects of explanations on applicant reactions: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 346–361. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2009.00478.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  199. *Tsigilis, N. (2005). The influence of intrinsic motivation on an endurance field test. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 45, 213–216.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  200. Tubbs, M. E. (1986). Goal setting: A meta-analytic examination of the empirical evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 474–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  201. *Tyagi, P. K. (1985). Relative importance of key job dimensions and leadership behaviors in motivating salesperson work performance. Journal of Marketing, 49, 76–86. doi: 10.2307/1251617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  202. *Van den Broeck, A., Sulea, C., Elst, T. V., Fischmann, G., Iliescu, D., & De Witte, H. (2014). The mediating role of psychological needs in the relation between qualitative job insecurity and counterproductive work behavior. The Career Development International, 19, 526–547. doi: 10.1108/CDI-05-2013-0063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  203. Van den Broeck, A., Vansteenkinste, M., De Witte, H., & Lens, W. (2008). Explaining the relationships between job characteristics, burnout, and engagement: The role of basic psychological need satisfaction. Work and Stress, 22, 2770294. doi: 10.1080/02678370802393672.Google Scholar
  204. Van Eerde, W., & Thierry, H. (1996). Vroom’s expectancy models and work-related criteria: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 575–586. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.81.5.575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  205. *Van Rossum, J., & Vermeer, A. (1990). Perceived competence: A validation study in the field of motoric remedial teaching. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 37, 71–81. doi: 10.1080/0156655900370108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  206. *Van Yperen, N. W. (2006). A novel approach to assessing achievement goals in the context of the 2 x 2 framework: Identifying distinct profiles of individuals with different dominant achievement goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1432–1445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  207. Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Motivating learning, performance, and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 246–260. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.246.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  208. *Vansteenkiste, M., Niemiec, C. P., & Soenens, B. (2010). The development of the five mini-theories of self-determination theory: An historical overview, emerging trends, and future directions. Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 16, 105–165. doi: 10.1108/S0749-7423(2010)000016A007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  209. Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Soenens, B., & Matos, L. (2005). Examining the motivational impact of intrinsic versus extrinsic goal framing and autonomy-supportive versus internally controlling communication style on early adolescents’ academic achievement. Child Development, 76, 483–501. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00858.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  210. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  211. *Waters, L., Roach, D., & Batlis, N. (1974). Organizational climate dimensions and job-related attitudes. Personnel Psychology, 27, 465–476. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1974.tb01168.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  212. *Wang, Q., Chan, H.-W., & Lin, L. (2012). Antecedents of Chinese parents’ autonomy support and psychological control: The interplay between parents’ self-development socialization goals and adolescents’ school performance. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41, 1442–1454. doi: 10.1007/s10964-012-9760-0.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  213. *Weiner, M. J., & Mander, A. M. (1978). The effects of reward and perception of competency upon intrinsic motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 2, 67–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  214. White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66, 297–333. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1974.tb01168.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  215. Whitener, E. M. (1990). Confusion of confidence intervals and credibility intervals in meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 315–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  216. Williams, G. C., Frankel, R. M., Campbell, T. L., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Research on relationship-centered care and healthcare outcomes from the Rochester Biopsychosocial Program: A self-determination theory integration. Families, Systems, & Health, 18, 79–90. doi: 10.1037/h0091854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  217. *You, S., Dang, M., & Lim, S. A. (2015). Effects of student perceptions of teachers’ motivational behavior on reading, English, and mathematics achievement: The mediating role of domain specific self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation. Child & Youth Care Forum Jun. doi: 10.1007/s10566-015-9326-x.Google Scholar
  218. Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social Facilitation. Science, 149(3681), 269–274.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher P. Cerasoli
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jessica M. Nicklin
    • 2
  • Alexander S. Nassrelgrgawi
    • 3
  1. 1.The Group for Organizational Effectiveness, Inc. (gOE)AlbanyUSA
  2. 2.University of HartfordWest HartfordUSA
  3. 3.State University of New York, University at AlbanyAlbanyUSA

Personalised recommendations