CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,305Motivation and Self-Concept in SportsJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorHuman Behavior and Motivation

Capturing autonomy, competence, and relatedness at work: Construction and initial validation of the Work‐related Basic Need Satisfaction scale

Open access
Van den Broeck, Anja, Vansteenkiste, Maarten, De Witte, Hans, Soenens, Bart, Lens, Willy·2010·Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology
DOI 10.1348/096317909x481382
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The satisfaction of the basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, as defined in Self‐Determination Theory, has been identified as an important predictor of individuals' optimal functioning in various life domains. The study of work‐related need satisfaction seems, however, hampered by the lack of a validated measure. To assist future research, the present study aimed to develop and validate a Work‐related Basic Need Satisfaction scale (W‐BNS). Using four Dutch‐speaking samples, evidence was found for the three‐factor structure of the scale, the discriminant validity, and the reliability of the three need satisfaction subscales as well as their criterion‐related and predictive validity. The W‐BNS may therefore be considered as a promising tool for future research and practice.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1348/096317909x481382

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Making significant contributions at work fulfills individuals' basic need to demonstrate competence at work.

    “Making significant contributions at work fulfills individuals' basic need to demonstrate competence at work (Van den Broeck, Vansteenkiste, Witte, Soenens, & Lens, 2010).”

    From What satisfies younger versus older employees, and why? An aging perspective on equity theory to explain interactive effects of employee age, monetary rewards, and task contributions on job satisfaction (2020) · cites this paper as Van den Broeck, Vansteenkiste, Witte, Soenens, & Lens, 2010

    The Conceptualization section defines competence satisfaction as a feeling of effectiveness resulting from mastering a task, which supports the connection between successful work and competence. But the SDT’s empirical basis section says accomplishing a work task might satisfy the need for competence and that satisfaction is not guaranteed. The source therefore does not support the claim that making significant contributions necessarily fulfills that need. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Earlier measures of BPNT's psychological needs primarily tapped into the presence of need satisfaction, with a few items measuring the absence or deprivation of need satisfaction being reverse-scored and combined into a composite satisfaction score.

    “Earlier measures of BPNT's psychological needs primarily tapped into the presence of need satisfaction, with a few items measuring the absence or deprivation of need satisfaction being reverse-scored and combined into a composite satisfaction score (e.g.Reeve and Sickenius 1994;Sheldon et al. 2001;Van den Broeck et al. 2010).”

    From Basic psychological need theory: Advancements, critical themes, and future directions (2020) · cites this paper as Van den Broeck et al. 2010

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Twelve items adopted from Van den Broeck et al. (2010) were used to measure employee psychological need satisfaction, including competence (α = .89) and relatedness (α = .80).

    “Twelve items adopted from Van den Broeck et al. (2010) were used to measure employee psychological need satisfaction, including their need for competence (e.g., “I feel adequately prepared to perform my job during the pandemic,” α = .89), and need for relatedness (e.g., “I feel connected with other people in my organization during the pandemic,” α = .80).”

    From Fostering Employee Trust via Effective Supervisory Communication during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Through the Lens of Motivating Language Theory (2022) · cites this paper as Van den Broeck et al. (2010)

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., Gagne ´, M., Leone, D. R., Usunov, J., & Kornazheva, B. P. (2001). Need satisfaction, motivation, and well-being in the work organizations of a former Eastern bloc country. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 930-942.
  2. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W., & Leiter, M. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397-422.
  3. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  4. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A confirmative analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Van den Broeck, A., Vansteenkiste, M., De Witte, H., Soenens, B., & Lens, W.
Affiliations
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-12
Volume
83
Issue
4
Pages
981-1002
ISSN
  • 0963-1798 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8325
DOI
10.1348/096317909x481382
OpenAlex
W2009114734
Cited by
1,305
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 102 · 2025: 114 · 2024: 117 · 2023: 110 · 2022: 114 · 2021: 110 · 2020: 138 · 2019: 96 · 2018: 79 · 2017: 66 · 2016: 53 · 2015: 62 · 2014: 49 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 33
FWCI
39.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 62 d)
Locations
  • Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
  • Vlaamse regering
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Human Behavior and Motivation
Keywords
autonomy, competence, relatedness, self-determination theory, scale development, psychometric validation, employee motivation

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