Cited by 93Behavioral Health and InterventionsMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsBehavioral and Psychological Studies

Does increasing autonomous motivation or perceived competence lead to health behavior change? A meta-analysis

Open access
Sheeran, Paschal, Wright, Charles E., Avishai, Aya, Villegas, Megan E., Rothman, Alexander J., Klein, William M. P.·2021·Health Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Despite abundant observational and experimental tests, it is not yet clear whether enhancing autonomous motivation or perceived competence leads to health behavior change. We identified interventions that aimed to change these constructs and quantified the magnitude of changes in behavior observed when interventions generated increases in autonomous motivation, perceived competence, or both. METHOD: Computerized searches and additional strategies identified 67 articles that yielded 135 effect sizes relevant to our research questions. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted via STATA. RESULTS: Interventions increased autonomous motivation and perceived competence in 31% and 38% of tests, respectively. Increasing autonomous motivation led to a medium change in health behaviors (d+ = .47, 95% CI [.44, .83]) and increasing perceived competence generated a small-to-medium change (d+ = .34, 95% CI [.22, .47]). Interventions that failed to generate significant improvements in autonomous motivation and perceived competence had much smaller effects on behavior change (d+ = .13 and .10, respectively). There was little evidence of synergistic effects. Changing both autonomous motivation and perceived competence (d+ = .42) did not lead to a larger effect on behavior compared with changing autonomous motivation on its own (d+ = .61), but had a larger effect compared with changing perceived competence on its own (d+ = .21). CONCLUSION: The present review suggests that autonomous motivation and perceived competence are valid targets for interventions to promote health behavior change but also indicates that research is warranted to ensure that interventions more effectively engage these targets. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/hea0001111

Cites

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sheeran, P., Wright, C. E., Avishai, A., Villegas, M. E., Rothman, A. J., & Klein, W. M. P.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • National Cancer Institute (US)
Venue
Health Psychology
Published
2021-10
Volume
40
Issue
10
Pages
706-716
ISSN
  • 0278-6133 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-7810
OpenAlex
W4200331395
Cited by
93
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 7
FWCI
10.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Keywords
autonomous motivation, perceived competence, health behavior change, behaviour change interventions, self-determination theory, intervention targets, synergistic effect
MeSH terms
Health Promotion, Humans, Motivation, Health Behavior, Personal Autonomy

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