Cognitive evaluation theory
Psychlopedia -- Key theories -- Motivational theories -- Cognitive evaluation theory
Cognitive evaluation theory is a precursor of self-determination theory and centers on the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Deci, 1975& Vansteenkiste, Lens, & Deci, 2006). When individuals experience intrinsic motivation, they engage in behaviors they perceive as inherently interesting, satisfying, gratifying, enjoyable, fulfilling, and absorbing. When individuals experience extrinsic motivation, they engage in behaviors merely because of the objective consequences they might attract, such as tangible rewards or praise. In contrast to extrinsic motivation, intrinsic motivation tends to enhance persistence, wellbeing, and creativity.
Originally, these two forms of motivation were regarded as additive (Atkinson, 1964)& that is, increases in either intrinsic or extrinsic motivation would promote a corresponding escalation in behavior. However, in contrast to this additive model, an extensive array of studies showed that extrinsic rewards, such as deadlines (Amabile, DeJong, & Lepper, 1976), and surveillance (Plant & Ryan, 1985), tended to curb the intrinsic motivation to engage in these acts (for a meta-analysis, see Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999& see also the overjustification effect).
In some instances, however, these extrinsic rewards do not compromise the intrinsic motivation of individuals. Specifically, rewards that did not depend on performance did not cub intrinsic motivation, presumably because such incentives did not seem to control behavior (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999). Taken together, these findings indicate that any forces that curb autonomy and choice--impending rewards, threats, or evaluations, for example--tend to reduce intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Similarly, a social climate that is supportive, rather than controlling, also tends to inflate intrinsic motivation (e.g., Vansteenkiste, Simons, Lens, Sheldon, & Deci, 2004).
One exception to this pattern of observations has been observed: positive evaluations of performance, although not a manifestation of autonomy, sometimes increase rather than decrease intrinsic motivation (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999). Accordingly, Deci and Ryan (2000) argued that information that underscores the competence of individuals also confers intrinsic motivation.
Consequences of intrinsic motivation
Creativity: Role of pro-social motives
Many studies have shown that an intrinsic motivation enhances creativity. Nevertheless, Grant and Berry (2011) highlighted some complications that challenge the simplicity of this conclusion. In particular, according to Grant and Berry (2011), intrinsic motivation tends to enhance the originality, but not always the utility, of ideas. That is, when individuals experience these forms of motivation, their suggestions are often novel but may not be useful.
To clarify, if individuals experience an intrinsic motivation, their primary objective is to satisfy their curiosities and pursue their interests. Their attention, therefore, tends to be oriented towards novel stimuli or unconventional concepts. Because of this orientation, their thoughts and suggestions are more likely to be original. Although original, these thoughts will not necessarily align to the needs of other people. They will not, therefore, fulfil one of the key criteria of creativity: usefulness.
However, if individuals experience a pro-social motivation, in which they care about the interests of other people, their suggestions are more likely to be useful. Because of this pro-social motivation, individuals are more inclined to adopt the perspective of other people. Their thoughts and suggestions, consequently, are more likely to align somewhat to the needs and concerns of other individuals. Their ideas will tend to be useful.
In short, these arguments imply that an intrinsic motivation is likely to promote creativity, but only if individuals also exhibit a pro-social motivation. Grant and Berry (2011) conducted three studies that substantiate this hypothesis. In the first study, participants completed a scale that assesses intrinsic motivation at work. They also completed questions that gauge the degree to which they are motivated to benefit other people at work, reflecting a pro-social motivation. Finally, their supervisors rated the extent to which their ideas are creative. As hypothesized, intrinsic motivation was positively related to creativity, but only when pro-social motivation was elevated.
The second study was similar, except many other variables were controlled. That is, the same pattern of findings were observed even after controlling skill variety and autonomy on the job, a sense of psychological safety, conscientiousness, and extraversion. Furthermore, pro-social motivation was shown to enhance perspective taking, which in turn moderated the relationship between intrinsic motivation and creativity.
In the final study, intrinsic motivation and pro-social motivation were manipulated instead of measured. To evoke an intrinsic motivation, for example, participants were granted a choice over which of two tasks to complete. They were then told they chose the interesting task. Hence, both choice and interest were emphasized---key determinants of intrinsic motivation. To curb intrinsic motivation, after participants chose a task, this choice was rejected, and they were told to perform a boring task instead. Actually, participants in both groups still completed the same task.
To manipulate pro-social motivation, all participant were instructed to generate ideas that could help a band. To evoke a pro-social motivation, some participants were told the band greatly needed assistance, to elicit a sense of empathy or compassion. Other participants were told the band does not greatly need assistance. As in the previous studies, intrinsic motivation was more likely to enhance the creativity of ideas but if coupled with a pro-social motivation.
One practical implication is that managers should evoke compassion in employees to enhance creativity. They could, for example, as vividly as possible, depict the problems and emotions that customers are experiencing.
Creativity: Role of self-control
Chang, Huang, and Choi (2012) showed that autonomy does not always improve the originality of solutions. Indeed, if people report limited self-control or discipline, autonomy can actually diminish the originality of solutions.
In this study, participants completed the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking-Figural Forms, comprising a series of tasks. For example, on one task, the individuals were asked to draw a picture that includes a teardrop or jellybean. Before completing these tasks, however, levels of self-control were gauged, with questions such as "People would say that I have strong self-discipline". In addition, levels of autonomy were also manipulated. To foster autonomy, some participants were permitted to shift between the tasks. To impede autonomy, other participants were told to dedicate six minutes to each task. Interestingly, if self-control was limited, participants provided more original responses if granted no autonomy. Presumably, these individuals could not motivate themselves or coordinate their tasks as effectively& they performed better when specific instructions were imposed.
In contrast to the implications of cognitive evaluation theory, many experts and managers assume that individuals will not work effectively unless they are monitored carefully and rewarded appropriately. They presume that employees, for example, will withdraw effort unless somebody else, like a supervisor, encourages them to work effectively. This assumption does not only diverge from scientific findings but also overlooks the capacity of individuals to encourage themselves whenever they feel autonomous.
Specifically, as Zell, Warriner, and Albarracin (2012) showed, when individuals feel autonomous, they tend to split their consciousness into two characters: a commander and an achiever. The commander communicates directives, such as "You need to concentrate" and the achiever implements these directives. The upshot is that people tend to engage in self-talk, intended to motivate themselves to complete tasks, whenever they feel autonomous and intrinsically motivated.
To illustrate, in one study, conducted by Zell, Warriner, and Albarracin (2012), on some trials, participants read various scenarios about a person who felt autonomous& for example, a man might have reflected upon whether or not he should arise from bed in the morning. On other trials, participants read various scenarios about a person whose behavior was constrained by someone else& for example, one child was directed to be silent by a parent. After they were exposed to each scenario, participants imagined what the individuals would think in these scenarios. Independent judges rated these thoughts. If the scenario invited autonomy, the thoughts of participants tended to include the word "You" as well as imperatives, such as "must concentrate". As these results imply, when people feel autonomous, their self-thoughts tend to revolve around one facet of their psyche directing commands to another part of their psyche.
Further studies, conducted by Zell, Warriner, and Albarracin (2012), uncovered other conditions that promote this form of self-talk. In particular, if people experience adverse events or implement activities, rather than plan or evaluate activities, their self-talk is also likely to comprise the word "You" as well as imperatives.
Determinants of intrinsic motivation
Individuals are intrinsically motivated to engage in tasks that seem interesting and challenging. Many factors can increase the likelihood that a task appears to be interesting, such as novelty, incongruity, surprise, and humor (e.g., Hidi & Renninger 2006& Matarazzo, Durik & Delaney, 2010& Silvia, 2003, 2005).
Several studies have examined the benefits of humor on task interest, revealing a complex seriers of observations. Humor comprises many features that foster interest, such as novelty and incongruity. Novelty and incongruity tend to increase arousal and generate involvement in the task. In addition, humor increases positive emotions, and these positive emotions can also increase motivation to participate (Matarazzo, Durik & Delaney, 2010).
Nevertheless, the effects of humor are not straightforward. To illustrate, Matarazzo, Durik and Delaney (2010) examined the effects of humor on learning mathematics. Specifically, in this study, participants were taught a particular algorithm, comprising four steps, that enables individuals to multiply numbers without using a pen and paper.
Some, but not all, participants were exposed to humorous material while learning this technique. An example is "Anita Man signed up for an online dating service. Since then, she has gone on 14 first-dates each month for the last 12 months, and is still single. How many men has Anita Man driven away with her charm?". In addition, only some, but not, all participants were exposed to humor after they learnt this technique but while they received instructions about an impending exam. An example is "You will have 3 min to complete as many of the problems as you can...Begin when you are ready to multiply your little heart out".
Before the learning phase, participants answered some questions that assess their interest in mathematics. A typical question is "Math just doesn't appeal to me". After the learning phase and test instructions, they received an exam, assessing their ability to apply the technique and to multiply numbers. Finally, they completed a series of measures, intended to assess the extent to which they felt involved and absorbed in the task, the emotions they experienced, and the degree to which they felt the technique was interesting.
If participants were not usually interested in mathematics, humor while learning the technique increased the likelihood they enjoyed the task. Specifically, humor also curbed feelings anger or hostility, and these feelings enhanced interest. In contrast, if participants are usually interested in mathematics, the humor at this time did not increase task enjoyment. Indeed, humor slightly compromised enjoyment in these participants. Humor during the instructions before the exam were not effective. Finally, humor did not actually improve exam performance.
The second study was similar, but also examined whether resentment and perceptions of the teacher were related to humor However, neither of these factors mediated the association between humor and enjoyment.
In short, humor seems to be effective in people who are not otherwise motivated or interested in the task. If individuals are usually interested in the task, the humor might be ineffective or even counterproductive. Humor might distract attention and curb absorption or merely imply the task is not inherently interesting.
When people engage in rituals, they actually tend to consume more food, including chocolates, lemonade, and even healthy snacks, such as carrots (Vohs, Wang, Gino, & Norton, 2013). A delay between the ritual and the opportunity to consume these foods merely amplifies enjoyment of this consumption.
For example, in one study, conducted by Vohs, Wang, Gino, and Norton (2013), participants were asked to taste some chocolate. Before tasting the chocolate, however, some participants engaged in a ritual: They were asked to break the chocolate in two, unwrap one half and eat that half before unwrapping the other half. If participants had engaged in this ritual, they reported enjoying the chocolate more. They also spent more time eating the chocolate--a measure of savoring. They also claimed they would be willing to pay more to buy this chocolate in the future.
The second study was similar, besides a few changes. First, participants ate carrots rather than chocolate. Second, they performed either the same ritual before tasting each carrot--tapping their knuckles on the desk, breathing deeply, and closing their eyes--or different movements before tasting each carrot. Third, in one condition, a delay between the ritual and consumption was imposed. Only the repeated ritual enhanced both anticipation and enjoyment of the carrot. Interestingly, the delay heightened these responses. Presumably, the delay evoked a goal that revolved around enjoyment& the effect of goals tends to escalate, rather than decline, over time. As the third study showed, these effects diminish when people merely observed, rather than engaged, in these rituals. The final study showed that intrinsic interest and fun, rather than boredom, mediated the relationship between rituals and enjoyment.
Therefore, rituals, like stirring liquids or other actions, seem to promote a feeling of interest, improving enjoyment. Arguably, people may associate rituals with feelings of familiarity, promoting a sense of safety rather than anxiety.
Controversial topics are perceived as more interesting--and thus intrinsically motivating--than uncontroversial topics. Yet, controversial topics are also more inclined to evoke feelings of discomfort than uncontroversial topics. Consequently, in general, individuals are more inclined to allude to topics that are moderately controversial--controversial enough to foster interest without provoking undue discomfort. However, if the discussion is anonymous or between close friends, the likelihood of discomfort subsides.
These possibilities were proposed and validated by Chen and Berger (2013). In one study, the researchers analysed the number of anonymous comments that various articles on a website called Topix.com attracted. Independent judges evaluated the degree to which each article was controversial, defined as the degree to which they provoked dispute and debate. A moderately controversial topic was about a bill to ban e-cigarettes. A very controversial topic was about a senator who encourages students to encourage firearms on campus. The moderately controversial topics generated more comments than uncontroversial or very controversial topics.
Subsequent studies replicated this finding in a laboratory setting. Ratings of interest and discomfort mediated these relationships. In addition, as these studies showed, when the comments were no longer anonymous, the uncontroversial topics generated more discussion than moderately controversial topics. Finally, when conversing to friends, the most controversial topics generated the most comments.
Implications of cognitive evaluation theory
Self determination theory also offers some insight into the distinct variants of passion. For example, Vallerand, Blanchard, Mageau, Koestner, Ratelle, Lonard, Marsolais et al. (2003) distinguish two forms of passion: harmonious and obsessive passion. Harmonious passion emanates when individuals choose to engage in a beloved activity. That is, in this instance, the activity is inherently enjoyable or has been internalized into the identity of individuals. Individuals feel a sense of choice over whether they would like to engage in these pursuits.
In contrast, obsessive passion emanates from a compulsion in individuals to complete these activities. That is, individuals experience a controlled motivation. They feel they should undertake this activity to enhance their sense of worth, to impress another person, or to fulfill an uncontrollable urge to seek excitement. They do not feel a choice over whether they can engage in this pursuit: They feel compelled.
This dualistic model of passion has received empirical support. For example, in one study, conducted by Carbonneau, Vallerand, and Massicotte (2010), participants completed measures as to whether they experience harmonious passion or obsessive passion towards yoga. A sample item to measure harmonious passion is "Doing yoga is in harmony with the other activities in my life". A sample item to measure obsessive passion is "I have almost an obsessive feeling for yoga". Harmonious passion was negatively associated with the experience of anxiety and symptoms of illness over the next three months. Obsessive passion was positively associated with negative emotions over this period.
Adelberg, S., & Batson, C. D. (1978). Accountability and helping: When needs exceed resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 343-350.
Amabile, T. M., DeJong, W., & Lepper, M. (1976). Effects of externally imposed deadlines onsubsequent intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 92-98.
Ambrose, M. L., Arnaud, A., & Schminke, M. (2008). Individual moral development and ethical climate: The influence of person-organization fit on job attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 77, 323-333.
Amos, E. A., & Weathington, B. L. (2008). An analysis of the relation between employee-organization value congruence and employee attitudes. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 142, 615-631.
Ariely, D. (2009). Predictably irrational: The hidden forces that shape our decisions. London: Harper.
Atkinson, J. W. (1964). An introduction to motivation. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
Burgess, M., Enzle, M. E., & Schmaltz, R. (2004). Defeating the potentially deleterious effects of externally imposed deadlines. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 868-877.
Cameron, J., & Pierce, W. D. (1994). Reinforcement, reward, and intrinsic motivation: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 64, 363-423.
Carbonneau, N., Vallerand, R. J., & Massicotte, S. (2010). Is the practice of yoga associated with positive outcomes? The role of passion. Journal of Positive Psychology, 5, 452-465.
Carnevale, P., Pruitt, D., & Seilheimer, S. (1981). Looking and competing: Accountability and visual access in integrative bargaining. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 111-120.
Chang, J. W., Huang, D. W., & Choi, J. N. (2012). Is task autonomy beneficial for creativity? Prior task experience self-control as boundary conditions. Social Behavior and Personality, 40, 705-724.
Chang, L., Shih, C., & Lin, S. (2010). The mediating role of psychological empowerment on job satisfaction and organizational commitment for school health nurses: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47, 427-433.
Chen, Z., & Berger, J. (2013). When, why, and how controversy causes conversation. Journal of Consumer Research, 40, 580-593. doi: 10.1086/671465
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The empowerment process: integrating theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 13, 471-482.
De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2009). Volition and reasons for accepting temporary employment. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 17, 363-387.
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 Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Vol. 38. Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237-288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human autonomy: The basis for true self-esteem. In M. Kernis (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 31-49). New York: Plenum Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and the "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across life's domains. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49, 14-23.
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., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 627-668.
Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., Gagne, 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.
Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A. J., Sheinman, L., & Ryan, R. M. (1981). An instrument to assess adults' orientations toward control versus autonomy with children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 642-650. Kasser, T. (2002). The high price of materialism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
Eisenberger, R., & Cameron, J. (1996). Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth? American Psychologist, 51, 1153-1166.
Fernet, C., Guay, F., & Senecal, C. (2004). Adjusting to job demands: The role of work self-determination and job control in predicting burnout. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 39-56.
Filak, V. & Sheldon, K. M. (2003). Student psychological need-satisfaction and college teacher-course evaluations. Educational Psychology, 23, 235-247.
Filak, V. & Sheldon, K. M. (2008). Teacher support, student motivation, student need satisfaction, and college teacher course evaluations: Testing a sequential path model. Educational Psychology, 28, 711-724.
Frey, B. S. (1997). Not just for the money: An economic theory of personal motivation. Cheltenham, UK: Elgar.
Frey, B. S. (2001). Inspiring economics: Human motivation in political economy. Cheltenham, UK: Elgar.
Frey, B. S., & Jegen, R. (2000). Motivational crowding theory: A survey of empirical evidence. Journal of Economic Surveys, 5, 589-611
Gagne, M. (2003). The role of autonomy support and autonomy orientation in prosocial behavior engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 199- 223.
Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 73-96.
Green, M. C., Visser, P. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (2002). Coping with accountability cross-pressures: Low effort evasive tactics and high-effort quests for complex compromises. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11, 1380-1391.
Greene, D., & Lepper, M. R. (1974). Effects of extrinsic rewards on children's subsequent intrinsic interest. Child Development, 45, 1141-1145.
Greguras, G. J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009). 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.
Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). Autonomy in children's learning: An experimental and individual difference investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 890-898.
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.
Gropel, P. &, Kuhl, J. (2009). Work-life balance and subjective well-being: The mediating role of need fulfillment. British Journal of Psychology, 100, 365-375.
Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1975). Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159-170.
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.
Hall, A. T., Frink, D. D., Ferris, G. R., Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J., & Bowen, M. G. (2003). Accountability in human resources management. In C. A. Schriesheim & L. L. Neider (Eds.), New directions in human resources management (pp. 29-63). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Hall, A. T., Royle, M. T., Brymer, R. A., Perrewe, G. R., Ferris, G. R., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2006). Relationships between felt accountability as a stressor and strain reactions: The neutralizing role of autonomy across two studies. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, 87-99.
Harackiewicz, J. M. (1979). The effects of reward contingency and performance feedback on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1352-1363.
Hepburn, A., & Brown, S. (2001). Teacher stress and the management of accountability. Human Relations, 54, 691-715.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, 111-127.
Hodgins, H. S. (2008). Motivation, threshold for threat, and quieting the ego. In H. Wayment & J. Bauer (Eds.), Transcending self interest: Psychological explorations of the quiet ego (pp. 117-124). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hodgins, H. S., Brown, A. B., & Carver, B. (2007). Autonomy and control motivation and self-esteem. Self and Identity, 6, 189-208.
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.
Hodgins, H. S., Koestner, R., & Duncan, N. (1996). On the compatibility of autonomy and relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 227-237.
Hodgins, H. S., & Liebeskind, E. (2003). Apology versus defense: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 297-316.
Hodgins, H. S., Liebeskind, E., & Schwartz, W. (1996). Getting out of hot water: Facework in social predicaments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 300-314.
Hodgins, H. S., Weibust, K. S., Weinstein, N., Shiffman, S., Miller, A., Coombs, G.,& Adair, K. C. (2010). The cost of self-protection: threat response and performance as a function of autonomous and controlled motivations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1101-1114.
Hodgins, H. S., Yacko, H., & Gottlieb, E. (2006). Autonomy and nondefensiveness. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 283-293.
Hoffman, B. J., & Woehr, D. J. (2006). A quantitative review of the relationship between person-organization fit and behavioral outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 389-399.
Huang, X., Iun, J., Liu, A., & Gong, Y. (2010). Does participative leadership enhance work performance by inducing empowerment or trust? The differential effects on managerial and non-managerial subordinates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 122-143.
Huang, Y., Wang, L., & Shi, J. (2009). When do objects become more attractive? The individual and interactive effects of choice and ownership on object evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 713-722.
Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of work design literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1332-1356.
Jansen, K. J., & Kristof-Brown, A. (2006). Toward a multidimensional theory of person-environment fit. Journal of Managerial Issues, 18, 193-212
Kasser, T. & Sheldon, K. M. (2009). Material and time affluence as predictors of subjective well-being. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 243-255.
Kasser, T., & Ahuvia, A. (2002). Materialistic values and well-being in business students. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 137-146.
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.
Klar, M., & Kasser, T. (2010). Some benefits of being an activist: measuring activism and its role in psychological well-being. Psychological Science, 30, 755-777.
Koberg, C. S., Boss, R. W., Senjem, J. C., & Goodman, E. A. (1999). Antecedents and outcomes of empowerment: Empirical evidence from the health care industry. Group and Organization Management, 24, 71-91.
Koestner, R., Ryan, R. M., Bernieri, F., & Holt, K. (1984). Setting limits on children's behavior: The differential effects of controlling versus informational styles on intrinsic motivation and creativity. Journal of Personality, 52, 233-248.
Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49, 1-49.
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Jansen, K. J., & Colbert, A. E. (2002). A policy-capturing study of the simultaneous effects of fit with jobs, groups, and organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 985-993.
Kristof-Brown, A., Barrick, M. R., & Franke, M. (2002). Applicant impression management: Dispositional influences and consequences for recruiter perceptions of fit and similarity. Journal of Management, 28, 27-46.
Laird, M. D., Perryman, A. A., Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., & Zinko, R. (2009). The moderating effects of personal reputation on accountability-strain relationships. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 70-83.
Larson, D. G., & Chastain, R. L. (1990). Self-concealment: Conceptualization, measurement, and health implications. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9, 439-455.
Legault, L., Green-Demers, I., Grant, P., & Chung, J. (2007). On the self-regulation of implicit and explicit prejudice: A self-determination theory perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 732-749.
Lepper, M. R., & Greene, D. (eds.) (1978). The hidden costs of reward: New perspectives on the psychology of human motivation. Hillsdale, NY: Erlbaum.
Liden, R., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2000). An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 407-416.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press.
Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., & Earley, P. C. (1990). Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 952-959.
Lind, E. A., Kulik, C. T., Ambrose, M., & De Vera-Park, M. V. (1993). Individual and corporate dispute resolution: Using procedural fairness as a decision heuristic. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 224-251.
Lloyd, R. (2008). Discretionary effort and the performance domain. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Organisational Psychology, 1, 22-34.
Loveland, K. K., & Olley, J. G. (1979). The effect of external reward on interest and quality of task performance in children of high and low intrinsic motivation. Child Development, 50, 1207-1210.
Lund, O. C. H., Tamnes, C. K., Moestue, C., Buss, D. M., & Vollrath, M. (2007). Tactics of hierarchy negotiation. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 25-44.
Matarazzo, K. L., Durik, A. M., & Delaney, M. L. (2010). The effect of humorous instructional materials on interest in a math task. Motivation and Emotion, 34, 293-305.
Moller, A. C., & Deci, E. L. (2009). Interpersonal control, dehumanization, and violence: A self-determination theory perspective. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, 41-53.
Morgan, M. (1981). The overjustification effect: A developmental test of self perception interpretations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 809-821.
Morgan, M. (1983). Decrements in intrinsic motivation among rewarded and observer subjects. Child Development, 54, 636-644.
Mullan, E., Markland, D., & Ingledew, D. K. (1997). A graded conceptualization of selfdetermination in the regulation of exercise behavior: Development of a measure using confirmatory factor analytic procedures. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 745-752.
Niessen, C., & Volmer, J. (2010). Adaptation to increased work autonomy: The role of task reflection. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19, 442-460.
Orpen, C. (2000). The interactive effects of role uncertainty and accountability on employees use of upward influence tactics. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 37, 2-4.
Ostroff, C., & Schulte, M. (2007). Multiple perspectives of fit in organizations across levels of analysis. [References]. In C. Ostroff & T. A. Judge (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational fit (pp. 3-69). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Ostroff, C., Shin, Y., & Kinicki, A. J. (2005). Multiple perspectives of congruence: Relationships between value congruence and employee attitudes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 591-623.
Page, S. (2006). The web of managerial accountability: The impact of reinventing government. Administration & Society, 38, 166-197.
Pelletier, L. G., Dion, S. C., Slovinec-D'Angelo, M., & Reid, R. (2004). Why do you regulate what you eat? Relationships between forms of regulation, eating behaviors, sustained dietary behavior change and psychological adjustment. Motivation and Emotion, 28, 245-277.
Pelletier, L. G., Fortier, M. S., Vallerand, R. J., & Briere, N. M. (2001). Associations among perceived autonomy support, forms of self-regulation, and persistence: A prospective study. Motivation and Emotion, 25, 279-306.
Perry, D. G., Bussey, K., & Redman, J. (1977). Reward-induced decreased play effects: Reattribution of motivation, competing responses, or avoid frustration? Child Development, 48, 1369-1374.
Piasentin, K. A., & Chapman, D. S. (2007). Perceived similarity and complementarity as predictors of subjective person-organization fit. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 341-354.
Pieterse, A. N., Van Knippenberg, D., Schippers, M., & Stam, D. (2010). Transformational and transactional leadership and innovative behavior: The moderating role of psychological empowerment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 609-623.
Plant, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and the effects of self-consciousness, self-awareness, and ego-involvement: An investigation of internally controlling styles. Journal of Personality, 53, 435-449.
Quinn, R. E., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1997). The road to empowerment: seven questions every leader should consider. Organizational Dynamics, 26, 37-49.
Quoidbach, Dunn, E. W., Petrides, K. V., & Mikolajczak, M. (2010). Money giveth, money taketh away: The dual effect of wealth on happiness. Psychological Science, 21, 759-763.
Reis, H. T., Sheldon, K. M., Gable, S. L., Roscoe, R., & Ryan, R. (2000). Daily well being: The role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 419-435.
Riketta, M., & Landerer, A. (2002). Organizational commitment, accountability, and work behavior: A correlational study. Social Behavior and Personality, 30, 653-660.
Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 450-461.
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.
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.
Ryan, R. M., & Lynch, J. (1989). Emotional autonomy versus detachment: Revisiting the vicissitudes of adolescence and young adulthood. Child Development, 60, 340-356.
Ryan, R. M., & Solky, J. A. (1996). What is supportive about social support? On the psychological needs for autonomy and relatedness. In G.R. Pierce & B. R. Sarason (Eds.), Handbook of social support and the family: Plenum series on stress and coping (pp. 249-267). New York: Plenum.
Ryan, R. M., Koestner, R., & Deci, E. L. (1991). Ego-involved persistence: When freechoice behavior is not intrinsically motivated. Motivation and Emotion, 15, 185-205.
Ryan, R. M., Mims, V., & Koestner, R. (1983). Relation of reward contingency and interpersonal context to intrinsic motivation: A review and test using cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 736-750.
Ryan, R. M., Rigby, S., & King, K. (1993). Two types of religious internalization and their relations to religious orientations and mental health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 586-596.
Sakalaki, M., & Fousiani, K. (2011). About some personality misfortunes of opportunists: The negative correlation of economic defection with autonomy, agreeableness, and well-being. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 471-487. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00780.x
Schlegel, R. J., Hicks, J. A., Arndt, J., & King, L. A. (2009). Thine own self: True self-concept accessibility and meaning in life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 473-490.
Sheldon, K. M. (1995). Creativity and self-determination in personality. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 61-72.
Sheldon, K. M. (2008). Assessing the sustainability of goal-based changes in well-being over a four-year period. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 223-229.
Sheldon, K. M. & Bettencourt, B. A. (2002). Psychological needs and subjective well-being in social groups. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 25-38.
Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1998). Not all personal goals are "personal": Comparing autonomous and controlling goals on effort and attainment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 546-557.
Sheldon, K. M., & Filak, V. (2008). Manipulating autonomy, competence, and relatedness in a game-learning context: New evidence that all three needs matter. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 267-283.
Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (1998). Pursuing personal goals: Skills enable progress but not all progress is beneficial. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 546-557.
Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (2008). Psychological threat and goal striving. Motivation and Emotion, 32, 37-45.
Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., & Reis, H. (1996). What makes for a good day? Competence and autonomy in the day and in the person. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1270-1279.
Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., & Kasser, T. (2004). The independent effects of goal contents and motives on well-being: It's both what you pursue and why you pursue it. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 475-486.
Sheldon, K., Williams, G. C., & Joiner, T. (2003). Self-determination theory in the clinic: Motivating physical and mental health. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Siegall, M., & Gardner, S. (2000). Contextual factors of psychological empowerment. Personnel Review, 29, 703-722.
Siegel-Jacobs, K., & Yates, J. F. (1996). Effects of procedural and outcome accountability on judgment quality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 1-17.
Silvia, P. J. (2003). Self-efficacy and interest: Experimental studies of optimal incompetence. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62, 237-249.
Silvia, P. J. (2005). What is interesting? Exploring the appraisal structure of interest. Emotion, 5, 89-102.
Sims Jr., H.P., Szilagyi, A.D., & Keller, R.T. (1976). The measurement of job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 19, 195-211.
Sims, R. L., & Keon, T. L. (1997). Ethical work climate as a factor in the development of person-organization fit. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 1095-1105.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Individual empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1442-1465.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 483-504.
Spreitzer, G. M., Kizilos, M. A., & Nason, S. W. (1997). A multidimensional analysis of the relationship between psychological empowerment, and effectiveness, satisfaction, and strain. Journal of Management, 23, 679-705.
Tan, H., & Tan, C. (2002). Temporary employees in Singapore. What drives them? Journal of Psychology, 136, 83-102.
Tang, S., & Hall, V. C. (1995). The overjustification effect: A meta-analysis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 365-404.
Tetlock, P. (1983). Accountability and the perseverance of first impressions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46, 74-83.
Tetlock, P. (1985). Accountability: The neglected social context of judgment and choice. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 297-332). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Thomas, K. W., & Tymon, W. G., Jr. (1994), Does empowerment always work: Understanding the role of intrinsic motivation and personal interpretation. Journal of Management Systems, 6, 1-13.
Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: an 'interpretive' model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15, 666-681.
Thoms, P., Dose, J. J., & Scott, K. S. (2002). Relationships between accountability, job satisfaction, and trust. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13, 307-323.
Uysal, A., Lin, H. L., & Knee, C. R. (2009). The role of need satisfaction in self concealment and wellbeing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 187-199.
Vallerand, R. J. , Blanchard, C. M. , Mageau, G. A. , Koestner, R., Ratelle, C. F., Lonard, M., Marsolais, J. et al. (2003). Les passions de l'me: On obsessive and harmonious passion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85 ,756-767.
Van den Bos, K. (2001). Uncertainty management: The influence of human uncertainty on reactions to perceived fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 931-941.
Van den Bos, K. (2003). On the subjective quality of social justice: The role of affect as information in the psychology of justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 482-498.
Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2002). Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 1-60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Van den Bos, K., & Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2001). Referent cognitions theory: The psychology of voice depends on closeness of reference points. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 616-626.
Van den Bos, K., Wilke, H. A. M., & Lind, E. A. (1998). When do we need procedural fairness? The role of trust in authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1449-1458.
van Prooijen, J. (2009). Procedural justice as autonomy regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1166-1180.
Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Intrinsic versus extrinsic goal contents in self-determination theory: Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 41, 19-31.
Vansteenkiste, M., Neyrinck, B., Niemiec, C. P., Soenens, B., De Witte, H., & Van den Broeck, A. (2007). On the relations among work value orientations, psychological need satisfaction, and job outcomes: A self-determination theory approach. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 251-277.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Motivation learning, performance and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 246-260.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Soenens, B., & Matos, L. (2005). Examining the impact of extrinsic versus intrinsic goal framing and internally controlling versus autonomy-supportive communication style on early adolescents' academic achievement. Child Development, 76, 483-501.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Soenens, B., & Lens, W. (2004). How to become a persevering exerciser? Providing a clear, future intrinsic goal in an autonomy supportive way. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 26, 232-249.
Verquer, M. L., Beehr, T. A., & Wagner, S. H. (2003). A meta-analysis of relations between person-organization fit and work attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 473-489.
Vohs, K., D., Wang, Y., Gino, F., & Norton, M. I. (2013). Rituals enhance consumption. Psychological Science, 24, 1714-1721. doi: 10.1177/0956797613478949
Weinstein, N., & Hodgins, H. S. (2009). The moderating role of autonomy and control on the benefits of written emotion expression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 351-364.
Weinstein, N., Przybylski, A. K., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Can nature make us more caring? Effects of immersion in nature on intrinsic aspirations and generosity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 1315-1329.
Wiechman, B. M., & Gurland, S. T. (2009). What happens during the free-choice period? Evidence of a polarizing effect of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 716-719.
Williams, G. C., & Deci, E. L. (1996). Internalization of biopsychosocial values by medical students: A test of self-determination theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 767-779.
Williams, G. C., Cox, E., Kouides, R., & Deci, E. L. (1999). Presenting the facts about smoking to adolescents: The effects of an autonomy supportive style. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 153, 959-964.
Williams, G. C., Freedman, Z. R., & Deci, E. L. (1998). Supporting autonomy to motivate patients with diabetes for glucose control. Diabetes Care, 21, 1644-1651.
Williams, G. C., Gagne, M., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). Facilitating autonomous motivation for smoking cessation. Health Psychology, 21, 40-50.
Williams, G. C., Grow, V. M., Freedman, Z. R., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1996). Motivational predictors of weight loss and weight loss maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 115-126.
Williams, G. C., Levesque, C. S., Zeldman, A., Wright, S., & Deci,E. L. (2003). Health care practitioners' motivation for tobacco dependence counseling. Health Education Research, 18, 538-553.
Williams, G. C., McGregor, H. A., Sharp, D., Levesque, C., Kouides, R. W., & Ryan, R. M.et al. (2006). Testing a self-determination theory intervention for motivating tobacco cessation: Supporting autonomy and competence in a clinical trial. Health Psychology, 25, 95-101.
Williams, G. C., McGregor, H. A., Zeldman, A., Freedman, Z. R., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Testing a self-determination theory process model for promoting glycemic control through diabetes self-management. Health Psychology, 23, 58-66.
Williams, G. C., Minicucci, D. M., Kouides, R. M., Levesque, C. S., Chirkov, V. I., & Ryan, R. M.et al. (2002). Self-determination, smoking, diet, and health. Health Education Research, 17, 512-521.
Williams, G. C., Rodin, G. C., Ryan, R. M., Grolnick, W. S., & Deci, E. L. (1998). Autonomous regulation and long-term medication adherence in adult outpatients. Health Psychology, 17, 269-276.
Zell, E., Warriner, A. B., & Albarracin, D. (2012). Splitting of the Mind: When the you I talk to is me and needs commands. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 549-555. doi: 10.1177/1948550611430164
Created by Dr Simon Moss on 8/27/2012
Free Personality Tests :