Implicit motives and basic psychological needs.
Saved in:
| Title: | Implicit motives and basic psychological needs. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Schüler, Julia (AUTHOR), Baumann, Nicola (AUTHOR), Chasiotis, Athanasios (AUTHOR), Bender, Michael (AUTHOR), Baum, Ingrid (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Journal of Personality. 2/1/2019, Vol. 87 Issue 1, p37-55. 19p. 1 Diagram, 1 Chart. |
| Subjects: | Basic needs, Self-determination theory, Intrinsic motivation, Human behavior, Autonomy (Psychology), Implicit attitudes |
| Abstract: | The present article starts with discussing similarities and differences between conceptualizations of human needs in self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan [1985], Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior; Deci & Ryan [2000], Nebraska symposium on motivation: Perspectives on motivation) and motive disposition theory (MDT; McClelland, Human motivation, 1985). The second section focuses on the two-process model of psychological needs (Sheldon [2011], Psychological Review, 118: 552), which aims to integrate the two approaches, whereas the third section highlights some aspects of both theories that are still decoupled or even contradictory, but nevertheless still have a high potential to be linked. These three aspects are (a) the noncorresponding concepts of implicit power motive (MDT) and basic need for autonomy (SDT); (b) the differentiation of needs into hope and fear components, which is theoretically embedded in MDT, but not in SDT; and (c) MDT researchers' differentiation into an implicit and explicit motivational system, which is not included in SDT. Particularly, the last section highlights the potential for areas in which further integration is possible, which provides a foundation for comprehensive and exciting research on human motivation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Personality is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | The present article starts with discussing similarities and differences between conceptualizations of human needs in self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan [1985], Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior; Deci & Ryan [2000], Nebraska symposium on motivation: Perspectives on motivation) and motive disposition theory (MDT; McClelland, Human motivation, 1985). The second section focuses on the two-process model of psychological needs (Sheldon [2011], Psychological Review, 118: 552), which aims to integrate the two approaches, whereas the third section highlights some aspects of both theories that are still decoupled or even contradictory, but nevertheless still have a high potential to be linked. These three aspects are (a) the noncorresponding concepts of implicit power motive (MDT) and basic need for autonomy (SDT); (b) the differentiation of needs into hope and fear components, which is theoretically embedded in MDT, but not in SDT; and (c) MDT researchers' differentiation into an implicit and explicit motivational system, which is not included in SDT. Particularly, the last section highlights the potential for areas in which further integration is possible, which provides a foundation for comprehensive and exciting research on human motivation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00223506 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/jopy.12431 |
