Cited by 261Motivation and Self-Concept in SportsPhysical Education and PedagogyEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness

Does observed controlling teaching behavior relate to students’ motivation in physical education?

De Meyer, Jotie, Tallir, Isabel B., Soenens, Bart, Vansteenkiste, Maarten, Aelterman, Nathalie, Van den Berghe, Lynn, Speleers, Lise, Haerens, Leen·2014·Journal of Educational Psychology

Abstract

Self-Determination Theory (SDT) has served as a theoretical framework for considerable research on teaching behavior and student motivation. The majority of studies have focused on need-supportive teaching behavior at the expense of need-thwarting teaching behavior (i.e., the “dark side” of teaching). The goal of the present study was to examine motivational dynamics involved in controlling teaching behavior in the context of physical education (PE). The majority of studies on observed teaching behavior were conducted in the laboratory. To augment the ecological validity in the present study the behavior of PE teachers was videotaped as to rate their controlling teaching behavior in a real-life setting. In a sample of 56 teachers and 702 secondary school students, controlling teaching behavior during a specific PE class, as observed by external raters, was related positively to students’ perceived controlling teaching behavior and, through these perceptions, to controlled motivation and amotivation. These associations were obtained in spite of the low incidence of controlling teaching behaviors, suggesting that students may be quite sensitive to controlling teaching behaviors. No associations were found between observed controlling behavior and student autonomous motivation and students’ perceptions of autonomy-supportive teaching. Practical implications and recommendations for PE teachers’ professional development training are included.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0034399

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
De Meyer, J., Tallir, I. B., Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Aelterman, N., Van den Berghe, L., Speleers, L., & Haerens, L.
Affiliations
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • HOGENT University of Applied Sciences and Arts (BE)
Venue
Journal of Educational Psychology
Published
2014-05
Volume
106
Issue
2
Pages
541-554
ISSN
  • 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2176
OpenAlex
W1994308266
Cited by
261
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 2
FWCI
14.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University College Ghent
  • Flemish Research Foundation (G.0234.10)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Physical Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
Keywords
self-determination theory, student motivation, physical education, high school students, controlled motivation, amotivation, autonomous motivation, autonomy support, teacher professional development

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