The support of autonomy and the control of behavior.

Edward L. Deci,Richard M. Ryan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1024

IF: 8.46

1987-01-01

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract:In this article we suggest that events and contexts relevant to the initiation and regulation of intentional behavior can function either to support autonomy (i.e., to promote choice) or to control behavior (i.e., to pressure one toward specific outcomes). Research herein reviewed indicates that this distinction is relevant to specific external events and to general interpersonal contexts as well as to specific internal events and to general personality orientations. That is, the distinction is relevant whether one's analysis focuses on social psychological variables or on personality variables. The research review details those contextual and person factors that tend to promote autonomy and those that tend to control. Furthermore, it shows that autonomy support has generally been associated with more intrinsic motivation, greater interest, less pressure and tension, more creativity, more cognitive flexibility, better conceptual learning, a more positive emotional tone, higher self-esteem, more trust, greater persistence of behavior change, and better physical and psychological health than has control. Also, these results have converged across different assessment procedures, different research methods, and different subject populations. On the basis of these results, we present an organismic perspective in which we argue that the regulation of intentional behavior varies along a continuum from autonomous (i.e., self-determined) to controlled. The relation of this organismic perspective to historical developments in empirical psychology is discussed, with a particular emphasis on its implications for the study of social psychology and personality.

psychology, social

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

This paper attempts to explore and support the distinction between "autonomy" and "controlling behavior", especially their roles in initiating and regulating intentional behaviors. The author proposes that events and situations can support an individual's autonomy (i.e., promote choice) or control behavior (i.e., exert pressure on specific outcomes). Research shows that this distinction applies not only to specific external events and general interpersonal situations but also to specific internal events and general personality orientations. In other words, this distinction is relevant regardless of whether the focus of analysis is on social - psychological variables or personality variables.

The paper further points out that factors that support autonomy are usually associated with higher intrinsic motivation, greater interest, less stress and tension, more creativity, stronger cognitive flexibility, better conceptual learning, more positive emotional states, higher self - esteem, more trust, the persistence of behavior change, and better physical and mental health. In contrast, controlling behavior is the opposite of these positive effects. Moreover, these results have been consistently verified in different assessment procedures, research methods, and subject populations.

Based on these results, the author proposes an organismic perspective, believing that the regulation of intentional behavior varies along a continuum from autonomy (i.e., self - determination) to control. The article also discusses the relationship between this organismic perspective and the historical development of empirical psychology, especially its significance for social psychology and personality research.