ArticleHeliyon2024
Evidence of validity and reliability of the controlling motivational style questionnaire in the work context.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Study on the Evaluation Method of Collaborative Dust Prevention Effect with Coal Miners-Based on Feature Reduction, Genetic Algorithm, and Backpropagation.Safety and health at work · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
According to the self-determination theory (SDT), leaders may adopt a controlling motivational controlling style (CMS) that forces employees to think, feel, or behave in a certain way to promote employee motivation. However, a scale has yet to be developed to measure CMS in the work environment. Usually, researchers use questionnaires adapted to different contexts or designed for another motivational style. However, whether these questionnaires capture the behaviors that represent CMS in the work context is little known. This research aimed to elaborate on and analyze the validity and reliability of the questionnaire on Controlling Motivational Style at Work (CMS-W). The study was based on a literature review of the types of controlling behaviors and a review of questionnaires used by SDT researchers who assessed the controlling motivational style in different contexts. A Peruvian sample of 1100 public sector employees participated. The results show that the short and encompassing CMS-W-11 has a one-dimensional structure with good fit indices: Robust RMSEA = 0.071 with 90 % CI from 0.064 to 0.078; Robust CFI = 0.975; Robust TLI = 0.969; SRMR = 0.025 and good reliability coefficients: Ω = 0.930 and AVE 0.630. Furthermore, it shows convergent validity with controlled motivation (r = 0.260, p < .001) and discriminant validity with autonomous motivation (r = -0.270, p < .001). Moreover, the invariance of the gender category was tested. The fit indices were adequate, and the comparative results between the models were also satisfactory. In addition, the behaviors of the CMS in a work context are conditional negative regard, judging and devaluing, control through objectives, intimidation, and intrusive authority. Therefore, labor organizations will have the CMS-W validated and tested in a work context to evaluate the CMS of leaders and study how it related to the motivation of human capital and organizational objectives.
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.