ArticleCurrent psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)2022
Autonomy-supportive agents: whose support matters most, and how does it unfold in the workplace?
Article in Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating 'NeedCraft' and 'NeedNurture': a dual-level realist-informed intervention protocol to enhance basic psychological needs at work.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Satisfied employees, stronger teams: linking need satisfaction to team-boosting behaviours via work engagement.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- A Symphony of Fire, Ice, and Fog: How Leaders' Interpersonal Styles Shape Psychological Needs and Motivation.Scandinavian journal of psychology · 2025Article
- From leadership humility to customer satisfaction: a study of employee engagement in the Chinese service industry.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Evaluating Need Crafting: Scale Validation and Workplace Implications.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Managers and colleagues satisfy others' need for autonomy, but employees can also satisfy their own need by engaging in autonomy crafting practices. Although all three sources of autonomy support can benefit employee outcomes, they may not be equally beneficial. Furthermore, their benefits may not be straightforward, but rather a psychological process unfolding. To test these assumptions, the aim of the present study was twofold: to determine whether the different sources of support explained significantly different amounts of variance in autonomy satisfaction when compared and to understand the psychological process through which autonomy support from three sources influenced performance, more specifically, whether autonomy support indirectly affected performance through perceived autonomy satisfaction and work engagement in serial. In a sample of 278 employees, autonomy support from others (especially managers) and autonomy crafting played a role in autonomy satisfaction. Furthermore, the results indicated that autonomy support was associated with performance through its serial associations with autonomy satisfaction and work engagement. The results emphasized the importance of autonomy support for performance, enabling organizations to proactively design interventions to improve engagement and performance. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-022-03550-9.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.