Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 245

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Self-Determination Theory and Public Policy: Improving the Quality of Consumer Decisions without using Coercion

Moller, Arlen C., Ryan, Richard M., Deci, Edward L.·2006·Journal of Public Policy & Marketing

Abstract

Self-determination theory identifies a basic psychological need for autonomy as a central feature for understanding effective self-regulation and well-being. The authors explain why policy that promotes autonomous choice for behavior change is often more effective than the use of coercion, especially when evaluating policy on a broad level with a long-term perspective.

Overview

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 · 10.1509/jppm.25.1.104

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 21 references

Cited by

See all 245

Metadata

Authors
Moller, A. C., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L.
Venue
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing
Published
2006-04
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
104-116
ISSN
  • 0743-9156 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-7207
OpenAlex
W1998783057
Cited by
245
References
21
FWCI
5.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Self-Determination Theory and Public Policy: Improving the Quality of Consumer Decisions without using Coercion. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1509/jppm.25.1.104
The paper
Moller, A. C., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Self-Determination Theory and Public Policy: Improving the Quality of Consumer Decisions without using Coercion. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.25.1.104

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.