The DOI matches its Crossref record.
We know this much is (meta-analytically) true: A meta-review of meta-analytic findings evaluating self-determination theory
Abstract
Self-determination theory (SDT) is a theoretical framework for addressing human motivation and wellness that has been actively and increasingly researched over four decades. As a cumulative knowledge base, many of SDT’s fundamental tenets have been repeatedly examined. We identified 60 meta-analyses that tested many of the propositions of SDT’s six mini-theories, other theory-based hypotheses, and SDT’s utility in applied domains. In this review we examine what these meta-analyses establish, highlighting the support they lend to the validity of SDT’s motivational taxonomy and its hypotheses regarding the respective effects of basic psychological need satisfaction and frustration on well-being and ill-being. Meta-analytic evidence also strongly supports the relevance of SDT for organizations, health care, parenting, and education among other domains, with identifiable gaps in the meta-analytic literature. We conclude by discussing the importance of broad theory and the use of meta-analytic knowledge as scaffolding for further theory and research, albeit with its own methodological limitations.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Self-determination theory (SDT) is a theory of motivation that posits individuals are motivated in the most sustainable and healthy ways when they experience optimal levels of autonomy, competence and relatedness.21”
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Collie, R. J., & Martin, A. J. (2024) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100224 · Cited by 105
Finding consensus on well-being in education
Curren, R., Boniwell, I., Ryan, R. M., Oades, L. G., Brighouse, H., Unterhalter, E., Kristjansson, K. R., de Ruyter, D., Macleod, C., Morris, I., et al. (2024) · Theory and Research in Education · doi:10.1177/14778785241259852 · Cited by 84
Self-citationAlberts, L., Lyngs, U., & Lukoff, K. (2024) · Interacting with Computers · doi:10.1093/iwc/iwae040 · Cited by 80
Patzak, A., & Zhang, X. (2025) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-025-09994-2 · Cited by 52
“They also clarified the purpose of these strategies: to enhance intrinsic motivation and support internalization which are fundamental processes for optimal functioning within self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2017; Ryan et al., 2022).”
InfluentialTeachers’ work motivation: Examining perceived leadership practices and salient outcomes
Collie, R. J. (2023) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2023.104348 · Cited by 104
“When principals are controlling, this can make teachers feel more pressured at work, which can result in amotivation as a means to avert those feelings of pressure (Ryan & Deci, 2017; Ryan et al., 2022).”
Influential
Metadata
- Authors
- Ryan, R. M., Duineveld, J. J., Di Domenico, S. I., Ryan, W. S., Steward, B. A., & Bradshaw, E. L.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Psychological Bulletin
- Published
- 2022-11
- Volume
- 148
- Issue
- 11-12
- Pages
- 813-842
- ISSN
- 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1455
- OpenAlex
- W4327660578
- Cited by
- 378
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 151 · 2025: 133 · 2024: 73 · 2023: 19
- FWCI
- 47.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Keywords
- self-determination theory, meta-review, evidence synthesis, motivation, autonomy, competence, relatedness
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
