Self-Determination Theory - Science topic

Self-determination theory can be very well applicable in design thinking framework while designing for intellectual disabilities. This theory can be further very well applied when designing and developing management ways for children with intellectual and neurotypical disorders.

Its main implication can be in the brainstorming, concept generation, ideation and testing phases. Especially while noticing the impact of certain self determined variable on a child or an individual.

This, can rather be very useful while testing certain speculation and observations which can have a positive impact on such community of individual.

Thus, in short short determined theory application in design thinking can be helpful for designing the ways and artefacts for the community who can’t suggest and state ways for themself and where the speculations are on a high count.

Physical activities for children with ASD includes activities in and outside of the classroom. This PA does not only include rigorous physical activities but activities that can enhance their learning and at the same time develop their strength and stamina. By then, they will learn and at the same time

motivated to engage any physical activities. Academic and physical activities can be integrated through games which the children will enjoy.

This will simply give you an idea that PA could not only be happened outside of school but in any location that is a welcoming environment for them. As to the clearer point of view, children with ASD will surely understand if it is simply explain and with scaffolding for a very good output.

Have you ever observed children? Why do the youngest children lie (like when they are just able to speak)? Young children are not taught to lie, so how do they know how to be untruthful, this complex, thoughtful, idea of not telling the truth even when asked to? They are obviously concerned about getting into trouble, displeasing the authority figure (intrinsic motivations)? This comes to mind when I read your query. So when parents find these lies cute (smile, laughing), or endearing are parents not encouraging the behaviors and thus, the lies continue. Parents then raise a child that lies, a teen that lies, etc. We know that lying is wrong. Why do adults lie, to ourselves and to each other? Even the smallest of fibs and encourage it at the youngest age? I realize your question is about adults, but we have a society that is less than honest about what they want, have helicopter parents to solve problems, and have a significant rise in undiagnosed mental illness. Of the three basic needs of self determination theory, what are parents/guardians missing in raising a resilient workforce?

Dear Ha Dee,

You could contact psychologists, even psychology students (from your institution or other institutions) who are good at psychometrics, statistics, and methodology. Of course, you can learn about the validation procedures on your own, however, an interdisciplinary team (e.g. you, an economist or student of economics, psychologist/student of psychology...) seems to be the best option for implementing your little project. The first phase of your research could be an initial validation with a sample of a smaller size. Later, you can validate it with larger samples from several institutions/companies.

Good luck and all the best,

Selman Repišti

Hi Ida, I share similar views with Lucas. The measurement is dependent on your research questions since most of the time they are measured independently to affect a specific behaviour. see this article for further insight

In attached figure you can see that autonomous motivation includes identified, integrated and intrinsic regulation. And intrinsic motivation mostly deels with the construst of interest according to its definition and mearsurement scale items.

Try the following references:

Choi, S. (2014). A measure of English Teacher Motivation: scale development and preliminary validation. Advanced science and technology letters, 59, 85-88.

Fernet, C., Senécal, C., Guay, F., Marsh, H., & Dowson, M. (2008). The work tasks motivation scale for teachers (WTMST). Journal of Career assessment, 16(2), 256-279.

Sajid, M., Rana, R. A., & Tahir, S. N. (2018). Development of teacher motivation scale at secondary level. Journal of Research & Reflections in Education (JRRE), 12(2).

Hi Emmanuel, as I have understood, autonomy has an impact on the value component of the model (Subjective Task Value) through the Interest/Enjoyment value of the task (roughly speaking, it is better to decide on yourself what you want to achieve, because intrinsic motivation brings more enjoyment then extrinsic reward), whereas competence ("I can do it") is crucial for the Expectation of Success through General Self-Schemata (like self-enhancement approach). What about relatedness, it contains in "Child's perception of..socialiser's beliefs.." (a small example: imagine that a child can be accepted by parents only when he/she is successful and how it can affect motivation). I hope this may help you

This paper will probably be of interest to you:

Dawes, J. (2008). Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used? An experiment using 5-point, 7-point and 10-point scales. International journal of market research, 50(1), 61-104.

I suspect there are subtle differences given the literature on ostracism, which I think would apply to isolation. In addition, I think isolation can potentially be interpreted as the absence of need satisfaction if it is interpreted as happening with a measure of control (e.g., I choose to walk alone on the beach) vs. isolation that is controlled by others (e.g., I walked alone because no-one would come with me). An absence of need satisfaction (a need not being met) is not the same as need frustration (the meeting of a need being blocked).

Consider this item from Longo et al.'s (2016) Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale: "On occasions, I feel people are a bit cold towards me". People being 'cold' is active rejection, not just incidental isolation. Think about the difference between being given the silent treatment by someone in the room with you vs. the absence of someone being in a room with you. These situations are qualitatively different. I don't know how well isolation measures vs. relatedness need frustration measures capture such differences.

Based on the theory, two types of motivation are known: internal and external.

There are several factors used in many cases. The best of them is known as the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, or the Spearman's correlation coefficien.

Looks interesting and promosing at the same time.

Interventions to support autonomy generally have the side effect of also increasing relatedness. This is because it frees up time and space to for employees to satisfy their relatedness needs. for example, in an autonomy supportive context employees then have more freedom to form work teams, liaise with colleagues, collaborate, etc., which might not naturally be a part of their work role.

We touched on this in our recent paper:

Slemp, G. R., Kern, M. L., Patrick, K. J., & Ryan, R. M. (2018). Leader autonomy support in the workplace: A meta-analytic review. Motivation and Emotion, 1-19.

The impersonal orientation is associated primarily with a lack of opportunities to satisfy the need for competence. Whether a person has little choice or all the choice in the world, if they feel they lack the competence to carry out any of their options, how much autonomy is available to them is a moot point.

Controlling behaviors don't inherently lead to amotivation; amotivation arises when someone doesn't value a behavior or its outcomes, or lacks the competence to engage in it.

I would caution you against branding defiant behavior as always "naughty;" one can pursue defiance for defiance's sake -- as a means of escaping control, which thwarts need satisfaction -- or defiance as an attempt to evoke autonomy support and get needs met.

I think this article may be helpful:

E-mail: florencia.sortheix@helsinki.fi

Am besten fragen Sie Florencia M. Sortheix direkt. Sie hat höchst wahrscheinlich die Daten noch und arbeitet bei der Universität in Helsinki, Finnland.

The original scale actually has 36 items based on 12 vignettes. This is the version that has been most widely used. From what I gather, the expanded version (with 17 vignettes and 51 items) was created because the vignettes in the original were pretty much all about "achievement" situations, and the authors wanted to include some relating to "social" situations. But it has not been so widely used - and you are correct, it is not available at the Self-Determination Theory web site.

I suggest you try two avenues of approach. First, return to the SDT site and use the "contact us" feature (button in upper-right corner) to inquire. Second, contact Holley Hodgins at Skidmore College. She was the lead author on the first paper that added the extra items, so she is a likely resource.

Good luck! Let us know how it works out.

Dear Daniel,

As you certainly know, Ed. Deci's self-determination theory is a theory about motivation and it is often invoked in the educational domain. The distinction between intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation is the core aspect of self-determination theory. For example, if a student studies because of his/her intellectual curiosity and desire to know the unknown, then s/he is intrinsically motivated. On the contrary, if a student studies because s/he wants to get, for example, an external reward, then s/he considered an extrinsically-motivated student. Even though self-determination theory is a prevalent motivational theory, namely in the field of education, it does not go without some problems and criticisms.

(1) It makes sense to distinguish between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. This distinction, however, has not to be seen as an "either-or" distinction. Suffice it to say that an individual can be intrinsically motivated in a certain domain of knowledge, psychology, for example, and extrinsically motivated in another domain of knowledge, mathematics, for instance. Thus, the same individual can be at the same time intrinsically and extrinsically motivated.

(2) Accordingly, it seems that it makes more sense to speak about predominantly intrinsic or extrinsic motivated individuals than intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivated individuals.

(3) Self-determination theory clearly lacks a developmental focus in that it does not look at the above mentioned distinction in developmental terms. Those who are acquainted with the developmental literature know quite well that the more a child is young the more s/he is focused on external outcomes, not on internal motives. Thus, it is likely that intrinsic motivation increases with increasing age. To think of an intrinsically motivated baby seems to deify our imagination. The same might be said of, for example, a 4-year-old child as far as metacognition is concerned. I cannot imagine such a child engaged in the following chain of thinking: "I know that you know what I know about you".

Daniel, in your question you refer to counter-theories to SDT. Skinner's (1969) theory of learning is one of them. It is difficult to imagine a self-determined or motivated individual in this theory. It suffices to say that, according to Skinner, the variables of which human (and animal) behavior is a function are in the environment. Bandura's (1977) social learning theory is mainly a behaviorist theory and hence a counter-theory to Deci's theory of self-determination. Because Bandura's (1986) social cognitive theory focus on both external outcomes and cognitive variables (e.g., self-efficacy) this theory is partly consistent with SDT and partly inconsistent with it. For example, it seems more than natural to associate self-determined individuals with individuals who have a high sense of self-efficacy, and individuals with a low sense of self-efficacy with extrinsically-motivated individuals. My answer, however, is a short answer to your question.

I hope that I has got your question and post, and that this helps.

Best regards. Orlando

Hi Meral,

My experience teaching both in an Intensive English Institute and working with language education overall suggests to me that the ways we teach are often the reasons for this.  Too often in language education we use very formalized and artificial activities for these learners.  Many courses still utilize "skill and drill" activities -- especially in the first courses in modern languages and the students lose interest because the activities are not authentic to true language use.  Of course, there are three decades of work addressing this problem (actually more like 50 years of work) that suggest that more active engagement, more authentic activities, more motivating activities -- even for beginners -- works best.  A couple of references to this are supplied.

Atkinson, D. (2011). Alternative approaches to second language acquisition. New York: Routledge.

Collier, V.P. & Thomas, W.P. (2009). Educating English language learners for a transformed world. Albuquerque, NM: Fuente Press.

Swain, M. (2006). Languaging, agency and collaboration in advanced second language learning. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Advanced language learning: the contribition of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 95-108). London: Continuum.

The following papers should be helpful to your topic:

Quite true Paul, collectivisation of work do help meet the relationship needs of workers, as proposed by SDT. But is this enough for them to experience the highest level of autonomous motivation. I am wondering if some empirical work exist in this area using SDT framwork.

This might be of some relevance

It certainly depends on how many questions and how frequently you are asking your participants. Among EMA studies conducted in youth, I've seen people providing incentives from $20/day to $20/week.   

I think you have answered your own question. It would seem a terrific endeavor to use the scales the way you indicated.

I'd like to receive the studies and results.   pratibhagramann@gmail.com

Pratibha Gramann, Ph.D.

How about this one? The German Psychological Need Satisfaction in Exercise Scale: Validation of a measure of need satisfaction in exercise.

By Rackow, Pamela; Scholz, Urte; Hornung, Rainer

Swiss Journal of Psychology, Vol 72(3), Jul 2013, 137-148.

Abstract

Self-determination theory (SDT) has become an established framework for exploring motivational processes in physical exercise. The integral components of SDT are three basic psychological needs. For our study we translated and validated a German scale that measures need satisfaction in exercise. A total of 614 individuals (n = 347 female, age: M = 38.39 years, SD = 12.05) recruited from a private fitness center, various sport clubs, and the Academic Sports Association Zurich, Switzerland, took part in the online-based baseline assessment (T1). Nine months later, 216 participants completed the online follow-up questionnaire (T2). The results demonstrate adequate factor validity and internal consistency at both measurement points. Moreover, construct validity was demonstrated by medium to strong correlations of several motives to exercise and the self-efficacy of physical exercise. In addition, the three subscales were differentially predictive for different types of motivation (for example, intrinsic and extrinsic) at T2, indicating good criterion validity. The newly developed German scale is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing need satisfaction in the context of physical exercise and predicting motivation over time. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Oh thank you for all these responses.. greatly appreciated. I'll look into each article suggested.

Hello Benedict,

If you don't receive any help with this, it might be worth contacting the authors to see if they know of a German version:

I hope you find what you are wanting.

Very best wishes

The positive attitude towards life is an important criterion for the hapiness of a person.

''Think positive, and positive things will happen.''

-Joffrey Lagura

Regards

Hi Nora,

Based on SDT, all three psychological needs are required for developing motivation. However, their importance is different with greater emphasis put on autonomy.

You can read this article for more information:

Hope it helps.

Hassan

Noted you intend to use both questionnaire survey and in-depth interview. It depends on what is your research paradigm and how you frame your research question and project. You could use the in-depth interviews, and identify themes underlying counselors' choice of their theoretical orientations, or design the survey based on what the research and literature out there are saying, and use the in-depth interviews to add further insights to what you have captured in your survey data. 'Influences' probably work better if you are approaching this qualitatively and inductively, especially if you have not found much literature in your context and country. But that is only my view, let's see if others can add to it.

There are several streams in the causality literature. In some of these (consider work by Judea Pearl), what you need is to address the endogeneity problem, where the dependent variable's residual and the predictor may be correlated. (Put another way, it is the problem of omitted causes.) You can solve this problem by using lagged variables, collected across time, or you may be able to address it using other, instrumental variables which give assurance that the the endogeneity problem has been addressed.

     However, such an approach only addresses the "yes / no" of the causal inference--it answers the question, "Is it reasonable to infer a causal relationship?" It does not address process or mechanism. If you have a notion of how the causal mechanism works, then you likely need data across time, so that you can determine whether change over time is consistent or not consistent with your proposed mechanism.

Here is a little fable.  One day I watched a grandfather, Leo, looking after his young granddaugther, Sarah.  Sarah had a pile of small cubes, some red and some blue.  There were two cups, one black and one white nearby.  She was picking up the cubes an placing them in either the white cup or the black one.  Every time she put a red in the black cup or a blue in the white cup a laughing noise came from near the cups, but not otherwise.  Sarah soon knew that red in a black cup or blue cube in a white cup causes a laugh.  Leo however knew this wasn't the case as he had a different world model to that of Sarah.

My message here is that experimental data together with a model may lead to an assertion of causality, but the validity of that assertion relies on the validity of the model not that of the data and the data analysis.

Thanx Angel... very glad finding people working on the same stuff.

EDIT: Ángel!! Didn't realize this was YOU! I was told you are almost there with your thesis... GRATS! Your work will definitely be an inspiration!

Dear Noud,

You can use the DEFINE command to create parcels within MPlus. 

For example with three items:

DEFINE:

parcel1 = (item1 + item2 + item3)/3

Than add this new variable in the USEVARIABLES ARE line behind all wihtim data set variables u use in your model and it should work.

Best

I would avoid the concept of self actualization like the plague--it is unintelligible--what is your purpose?

Hello Arno,

Do you know this article ?

I saw your references. I'll sugggest Schwartz but he just has known by you. 

I have no questionnaire, but the concept of goals has always intrigued me. Clearly sustainable behaviour must be based on those goals that on balance have the most meaning to a person at the moment of the behaviour, so a questionnaire that does not delve into the multiplicity of goals in play in a person at any one time will yield only superficial information ie that there is a gap or not. In this context, I mean goals to be ANY desired outcome, either immediate, short or long term, that is responsive to behaviour. I would suggest that it may well be a limbic 'weighing up' of immediate pleasures vs long term gain that is at play, so there will be a more pronounced gap for students with less self regulation (ability to put off short term gains), so a questionnaire that also measures self regulation would be useful.

Hello Tihana,

I find hard to see how personality can directly predict performance in intellectual games/tasks.Maybe emotional stability by reducing the negative emotional tone during the game. Also openness may predict creative strategies as well.

However, it is more likely that personality will predict behaviors related to training and preparation before a match (e.g. conscientiousness to study openings, and chess strategies), but most likely general cognitive ability should be the stronger predictor in this type of competitions. 

Let me add a plot twist. Back in 2014, we published the results of an experiment, which included 228 students, and found that besides their personality traits (we focused on conscientiousness and emotional stability), the way in which their mentor (leader) provided feedback after performing,  also was important. More precisely it influenced how strongly our participants scores in these two personality traits predicted performance in intellectual tasks.

You might want to check out our article, as I think that the conclusions of it may generalize into your study's setting.

Good luck with your research!

Lucas

For decades, organizations felt comfortable with policies, strategies, structures, systems, and business processes that kept them in the middle of the road—it made sense: after all, that is where clients stood or sat. These days, however, the middle of the road is the road to nowhere: there is so much change; there is so much pressure. There are so many different ways of doing everything that business-as-usual is dead. Without going into details, I am not sure such models as the McKinsey 7S Framework or the Burke–Litwin Model can serve sufficiently well in the 21st century: they are too tight wedded to Taylorism.

In 1994–1995, Sumantra Ghoshal and Christopher Bartlett published a trilogy of articles on Changing the Role of Top Management. The first, Beyond Strategy to Purpose, set the scene and argued that purpose—not strategy—is the reason an organization exists. In that and in the other two pieces, they recommended that organizations should move beyond strategy, structure, and systems to a framework built on purpose, processes, and people. They reckoned that a fatal flaw of the traditional strategy–structure–systems construct—which of course owes to scientific management mindsets—is the intention to minimize the idiosyncrasies of human behavior. They recommended (i) less emphasis on following clear strategic plans, and more importance to defining engaging purposes; (ii) less focus on formal structures, and more attention to effective processes; and (iii) less concern for control through systems, and more appreciation of capabilities and perspectives.

Hi Sharon, here is a good paper that studies intrinsic motivation from childhood through late adolescence.  In my career as a teacher, I do my best to strengthen intrinsic motivation, being fully aware that in my country, students are usually extrinsically motivated  by grades; and it is intrinsic motivation that develops scholars and scientists whose minds are close to their work.  

Yes, I have come across several students who make great strides in motivation to study!  Have a look at this paper.  All the best.

I quite like that perspective David,

The Basic Psychological Needs Sub-theory of Deci & Ryan's SDT does  include Autonomy and Relatedness in addition to Competence. 

Your point that to the extent that one is high on Autonomy and Relatedness but  low on Competence, then one could still enjoy high Intrinsic Motivation is insightful.

Essentially, one could exhibit high levels of  self-motivation without being high in achievement nor goal orientation.

I don't know if there are any direct comparisons. But Grouzet et al. 2005 uses Kasser & Ryan's intrinsic and extrinsic goals and provides their own circumplex model where they put all the goals on a circle with two dimensions: intrinsic vs. extrinsic and physical self vs. self-transcendence. Comparing that model with Schwartz circumplex model would be the place where I would start looking at the similarities and differences between the two models:

Grouzet, F. M. E., Kasser, T., Ahuvia, A., Dols, J. M. F., Kim, Y., Lau, S., … Sheldon, K. M. (2005). The structure of goal contents across 15 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(5), 800–816.

A useful start point might be http://www.selfdeterminationtheory.org/questionnaires/ 

In physical activity / exercise settings the BREQ (most recent BREQ-3) is a frequently used questionnaire which may be adapted for other contexts:

http://pages.bangor.ac.uk/~pes004/exercise_motivation/breq/breq.htm 

HI, 

For a brief, but very interesting overview, please check the following paper:

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. In T. C. Urdan & S. A. Karabenick (Eds.). Advances in motivation and achievement, v. 16A—The decade ahead: Theoretical perspectives on motivation and achievement (105-165). London: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. doi:10.1108/S0749-7423(2010)000016A007 

Regards,

Having been a coach involved in training and evaluating athletes, I can state from experience, the only subjective evaluation by coaches that provided realistic, reliable information about an athlete's performance came from a coach with whom I had the opportunity to personally validate the information provided by the coach. Once a coach had proven his ability to properly evaluate the athlete's performance, I would accept at face value, his statements. Unfortunately, in the vast majority of situations the evaluation of the coach was skewed by personal feelings, etc. causing the evaluation to be better or worse than the true abilities of the athlete. Therefore, before accepting a coach's evaluation a level of reliability and validity for the evaluation must be achieved, this requires you to be able to determine these things on your own to validate the information provided by the coach.

If the purpose of your investigation is to provide information for training and coaching athletes, subjective information may or may not be reliable and valid. You must have an objective means of measuring your target behavior or outcome, and that requires objective measures of performance. Specific tests of functional aspects of performance will, with an adequate understanding of the relationships of the variables being studied, provide better information about the characteristics under consideration than the best subjective information about the performance of the athlete from all but the best coaches. In my experience, probably less than 10% of coaches, are capable of valid, reliable subjective evaluation of training, coaching, or performance. Therefore, your best information will come from hard, objective measures.  

I agree that external pressure plays an important part on compliance. In some cases including voluntary disclosure of information in the financial and related statements arise due to awareness of the need for transparency, publicity opportunities, and sense of accountability. Ethical perspective may play a part.

Gin

These two publications are relevant to your question.

Regards,

The Center for Self-Determination Theory.

Hi,

 Dr Chris Niemiec at the University of Rochester, New York did a cross-international comparative study using students' narratives about their teachers/lecturers to examine motivation from an SDT perspective. I collected data here in South Africa on that project, but I don't think that work is published yet, so perhaps you can contact him directly with your question?

Individual or personal autonomy is the pure product of Anglo-American thinking. If we perceive this very issue by the prism of European Court of Human Rights and particularly based decisive and fruitful case-law above-mentioned institution, please find very critical insight and perception of the concept of individual autonomy emerged from courts reasoning.

CARING AUTONOMY European Human Rights Law and the Challenge of Individualism KATRI L ˜OHMUS Cambridge University Press 2015

The main dilemma connected value perception, one the one hand as author argued European court of Human Rights based on the liberal understandings of the notion meanwhile there are other options minimally understand this concept by the prism of communitarian perception. Thus, it is a very controversial issue and described as clashes between value understanding of the notion.

I'm not sure if this is quite perfect, but you can check out Prochaska's transtheoretical model of behavior change (Prochaska, J. O., DiClemente, C. C., & Norcross, J. C. (1992). In Search of How People Change. American Psychologist , 47 (9), 1102-1114.)

I found it interesting because it goes through the stages of change (from pre-contemplation all the way to action and maintenance) while including external factors.

Hi Merisa,

Given your question, I think you'll find this model most interesting: http://tec.sagepub.com/content/33/1/38.abstract

The model highlights 3 foundational skills of self-determination to foster in early childhood:

1: Choices/Problem-solving

2: Self-regulation

3: Engagement

In many firms, the key driver for operational excellence is "transformation through innovation”.

I found an interesting article written by Soren Kaplan entitled "How To Measure Innovation (To Get Real Results)" 

According to McKinsey, more than 70% of corporate leaders tout innovation as a top three business priority, but only 22% set innovation performance metrics.

One reason why that innovation metric gap exists is because there’s no set formula for what fuels innovation. What works for one company might be too fuzzy for the next. That said, there are a few things you can measure in order to figure out how innovative your company's culture is—it's the first step in figuring out how to reshape that environment and start promoting new behaviors.

Leadership

Percent of new innovations that come from external sources like crowdsourcing or open innovation

Percent of funding for game changers versus small tweaks to existing products or services

Percent of senior executive time focused on the future versus on daily operations

Employees

Number of ideas turned into patents by employees

Number of ideas turned into innovation experiments by employees

Number of teams that submit projects for innovation awards

Percentage of employees trained in the innovation process

Customers

Number of ideas submitted by customers through "open innovation" programs

Number of new product or service ideas that come from mining social networks

Number of customers that help test and refine new ideas

Regards

Zoheir

Belavadi,

There are useful questionnaires for measuring eudaimonic well-being base on SDT. 

You may check Huta`s papers (2010, 2013) as well as Eudaimonic Well-being questionnaire by Waterman (2010).

Good luck!

Hi

Please see these links:

When you say extensive reading in in second language ,it is obvious that you have an inclination to go in depth in the study of second language.This may also help you to gain & to acquire a good knowledge of the subject .

With this ,Self motivation should directly come to the surface of your mind provided you are positive in your approach .Self motivation is our merely process of our mind as it is directing the tune of our inner within .

Hey Elham,

you can combine different aspects of well-being using i.e.

- The satisfaction with Life Scale (http://internal.psychology.illinois.edu/~ediener/SWLS.html)

- an area specific scale like job satisfaction

= cognitive parts of well-being

- Positive affect negative affect scale (PANAS)

= affective parts of well-being

Southwest Somalia:

"South-West Somalia (Koonfur-Galbeed Soomaaliya) was an autonomous self-proclaimed state in Somalia founded by Hasan Muhammas Nur Shatigadad, leader of the Rahanweyn Resistance Army (RRA) on 01 April 2002.

Following the signing of the Jubba Agreement between officials of the South Western State of Somalia, Jubaland and the federal Somali government whereby it was agreed that an autonomous state could be established under the Provisional Federal Constitution, delegates representing the Bay, Bakool and Lower Shabelle regions met in the capital Baidoa on 27 March 2014 and elected Mohamed Haji Abdinur as president of the Southwestern State of Somalia."

-------------

"United States has welcomed the November 17 election of Sharif Hassan Sheikh Adan as President of the Interim South West Administration (ISWA) comprised of Bay, Bakool, and Lower Shabelle regions in southern Somalia.

“The United States welcomes this historic election and encourages the leadership of the ISWA to establish an administration that promotes inclusion of all communities in these regions, delivers essential services to its citizens, and furthers peace and stability,” Said U.S. Special Representative for Somalia (SRS) James P. McAnulty in a statement sent to newsrooms.

“We also encourage the ISWA to engage in productive dialogue with the FGS leading to its eventual formal recognition as a federal member state,” he added.

The United States Government said it remains a committed partner to the government and citizens of Somalia and will continue to support Somalia’s path towards a peaceful, stable, and prosperous future.

“ We recognize the critical role the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) played to help facilitate the reconciliation process and subsequent election, and urge concerted action to continue working towards meeting the Vision 2016 timelines for completion of the state formation process,”.

Hej Jakob,

Titta på dessa artiklar:

Human Autonomy in Cross-Cultural Context

Cross-Cultural Advancements in Positive Psychology Volume 1, 2011, pp 33-44

Date: 26 Nov 2010

Kennon M. Sheldon,Richard M. Ryan

Self-determination theory and basic need satisfaction: Understanding human development in positive psychology.

Deci, Edward L.; Vansteenkiste, Maarten

Ricerche di Psicologia, Vol 27(1), 2004, 23-40.

Från abstraktet: "In this article we discuss self-determination theory, specifying an organismic-dialectical meta-theory and suggesting that the concept of basic psychological needs provides a useful basis for predicting whether the social environment will support optimal functioning or will, alternatively, promote maladaptation and ill-being."

Self-Determination

Edward L. Deci, Richard M. Ryan

Published Online: 30 JAN 2010; Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology

DOI: 10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0834

Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation,

Social Development, and Well-Being

American Psychological Association, Inc. 0003-066X/00/$5.00

Vol. 55, No. 1, 68-78 DOI:

10.1037110003-066X.55.1.68

Richard M. Ryan and Edward L. Deci

Thanks for escalating the discussion.

Biochemically, a pond of hormones sits in the base of the brain, for example Acetylcholine. Pro-activity is closest to game play from your definition resulting in PRODUCTIVITY. But it can add anxiety domain to all the other domains mentioned. 

From real estate point of view, business and game play is on the dorso-lateral side of the frontal lobe, while emotion, obsession associated with bad emotions like depression is on the Basal and medial part of the frontal lobe...

I would agree with Mahmut that it is very dependent on the context. To take two examples, I once ran a predictive validity study, with job performance as the criterion, on temps - temporary admin staff hired from an agency. The lag between testing and measurement of job performance here was 1-2 days; if a temp is not doing their job competently after 1-2 days, this does not fit the employers needs. At the other extreme, I carried out a validation study with air traffic controllers. Here the lag was 3.5 to 4 years - 0-6 months waiting for a training place, 3 years of training and 6 months on the job before performance could reasonably be measured.

As Arthur Poropat has already written: There are a lot of studies that support self-determination theory and its practical implications. But it doesn't mean that it's perfect.

For some people the concept of Self-determination is somewhat confusing. If one doesn't believe that the free will exists, then an assumption of self-determination would be implausible.

Philosophical issues aside. There is also empirical criticism. The authors propose three psychological needs (competence, autonomy, relatedness). Why just these three? Other scientists have proposed more needs: Murray's system of needs, Maslow's hierarchy of needs, 16 basic desires theory (Steven Reiss) etc.

However, there are also pessimistic scientists, who assume that we have only one basic psychological need - the hedonistic one. We can derive all secondary needs or desires from this one.

We certainly need more cross-cultural studies if we want to test the hypothesis, that there are exactly three universal, innate psychological needs.

Sure! My advisor and I have worked on something similar. Email me at jsb0835@live.missouristate.edu

There are other measures of psychological need satisfaction that include fewer items.

Autonomy: Perceived Self-Determination in Life Domains Scale (Blais & Vallerand, 1991)

Competence: Perceived Competence in Life Domains Scale (Losier, Vallerand, & Blais, 1993)

Relatedness: Need for Relatedness Scale (Richer & Vallerand, 1998)

Each subscale has 4 items (you can take the Academic subscales). These scales can be downloaded from Robert Vallerand's website at: