Claims

Need satisfaction and autonomy support did not predict external regulation, and introjected associations did not hold in the full model

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? Variance in external regulation explained by need satisfaction was negligible (R2 = .004) in relative weight analysis. → Bureau 2022 q3 i? Small meta-analytic associations between both autonomy support sources and introjected regulation did not hold when needs and autonomy support predicted introjection within a single model. → Bureau 2022 (2)

Evidence

Bureau 2022

Bureau, J. S., Howard, J. L., Chong, J. X. Y., & Guay, F. (2022). Pathways to Student Motivation: A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents of Autonomous and Controlled Motivations. Review of Educational Research, 92(1), 46–72. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211042426

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Relative weight analysis of the three psychological needs predicting motivation types from pooled meta-analytic correlations. For external regulation, "variance explained by needs was negligible (R2 = .004), making the relative weight analysis meaningless"; the MASEM models likewise gave external regulation a mean R2 of .01.

"For external regulation, variance explained by needs was negligible (R2 = .004), making the relative weight analysis meaningless."

Bureau 2022 (2)

Bureau, J. S., Howard, J. L., Chong, J. X. Y., & Guay, F. (2022). Pathways to Student Motivation: A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents of Autonomous and Controlled Motivations. Review of Educational Research, 92(1), 46–72. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211042426

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

The discussion of the MASEM results reports that small bivariate autonomy-support associations with introjected regulation "did not hold when needs and autonomy support predicted introjection within a single model", with only small consistent positive indirect effects on introjected regulation.

"despite meta-analytic correlations showing a small association between both autonomy support sources and introjected regulation, these associations did not hold when needs and autonomy support predicted introjection within a single model."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id needs-autonomy-support-not-predict-external-regulation
title Need satisfaction and autonomy support did not predict external regulation, and introjected associations did not hold in the full model
description Need satisfaction and autonomy support did not predict external regulation, and introjected associations did not hold in the full model
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2022
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-20
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 2 — bureau-2022, bureau-2022-2

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.