Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38920760›Full record

ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Self-Determination Theory and Workplace Outcomes: A Conceptual Review and Future Research Directions.

Kaylyn McAnally, Martin S Hagger

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Self-Determination Theory and Workplace Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis.Stress and health : journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Kaylyn McAnallyDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of California, Merced, CA 95343, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6197-4253
Martin S HaggerDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of California, Merced, CA 95343, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2685-1546

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adaptive workplace outcomes, such as employee work engagement, job performance, and satisfaction are positively associated with physical and psychological well-being, while maladaptive workplace outcomes, including work-related disengagement, dissatisfaction, stress, boredom, fatigue, and burnout, are negatively associated with well-being. Researchers have applied self-determination theory to identify key motivational correlates of these adaptive work-related determinants and outcomes. Research applying the theory has consistently indicated that autonomous forms of motivation and basic psychological need satisfaction are related to better employee performance, satisfaction, and engagement, while controlled forms of motivation and need frustration are associated with increased employee burnout and turnover. Forms of motivation have also been shown to mediate relations between need satisfaction and adaptive workplace outcomes. Despite support for these associations, a number of limitations in research in the field have been identified, which place limits on the inferences that can be drawn. Noted limitations encompass an over-reliance on single-occasion, correlational data; few fit-for-purpose tests of theory mechanisms; and a lack of consideration of key moderating variables. In the current conceptual review, we discuss these limitations in turn, with specific reference to examples from the extant research applying the theory in workplace contexts, and provide a series of recommendations we expect will set the agenda for future studies applying the theory in the workplace. Based on our review, we make three key recommendations: we stress the need for studies adopting experimental and longitudinal designs to permit better inferences (i.e., causal and directional), highlight the need for intervention research to explicitly test mediation effects to provide evidence for theory mechanisms, and outline some candidate moderators of theory effects, including workplace context, job type, pay structure, and causality orientations. We expect these recommendations to set an agenda for future research applying self-determination theory in workplace contexts with a view to filling the current evidence gaps and improving evidential quality.

Indexed as

autonomous motivationbehavioral interventionjob satisfactionneed supportoccupation

Identifiers

PMID38920760
PMCPMC11200516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.