Cited by 210Motivation and Self-Concept in SportsBehavioral Health and InterventionsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Self-determination, self-regulation, and the brain: Autonomy improves performance by enhancing neuroaffective responsiveness to self-regulation failure.

Legault, Lisa, Inzlicht, Michael·2013·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

The importance of autonomous motivation in improving self-regulation has been a focal topic of motivation research for almost 3 decades. Despite this extensive research, however, there has not yet been a mechanistic account of how autonomous motivation works to boost self-regulatory functioning. To address this issue, we examined the role of autonomy in 2 basic self-regulation tasks while recording a neural signal of self-regulation failure (i.e., the error-related negativity; ERN). Based on the notion that autonomy improves self-regulation, we anticipated that autonomous motivation would enhance neuroaffective responsiveness to self-regulatory failure and thus improve performance relative to controlled motivation. In Study 1 (N = 43), we found that trait autonomy was positively associated with self-regulatory performance and that this effect was mediated by increased brain-based sensitivity to self-regulation failure, as demonstrated by a larger ERN. Study 2 (N = 55) replicated and extended this pattern using an experimental manipulation of autonomy; when autonomous motivation was contextually supported, task performance increased relative to those for whom autonomy was undermined and those in a neutral condition. In addition, this effect was mediated by both increased perceptions of autonomy and larger ERN amplitudes. These findings offer deeper insight into the links among motivational orientation, brain-based performance monitoring, and self-regulation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0030426

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Legault, L., & Inzlicht, M.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
2013-07
Volume
105
Issue
1
Pages
123-138
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2095854615
Cited by
210
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
14.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
  • Canada Foundation for Innovation
  • Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
autonomous motivation, self-regulation, self-determination theory, error-related negativity, performance monitoring, controlled motivation, task performance
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Brain, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Internal-External Control, Male, Motivation, Students, Task Performance and Analysis, Personal Autonomy, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review