Self-Determination Theory
Motivation tip #8
Self-Determination Theory, SDT
Une des théories majeures de la motivation et du bien-être.
En été 2022, j'ai eu la joie de traduire le sous-titrage français du
MOOC "Introduction to Self-Determination Theory: An approach to motivation, development and wellness",
produit par l'université de Rochester (NY), enseigné par Richard Ryan,
hébergé par Coursera (traduction N.Gestalder, révision V.Gautherot)
(https://www.coursera.org/learn/self-determination-theory).
Ce MOOC présente la SDT de façon très intéressante, quoique un peu répétitive.
Si vous avez un peu de temps, jetez-y un œil, c'est parfois… hyperpuissant… ébouriffant.
Théorisée par Edward Deci et Richard Ryan (précisément l'enseignant du MOOC), la SDT est une théorie majeure de la motivation et du bien-être, incontournable dans toutes les recherches liées à la motivation.
Ce n'est pas la seule bien sûr, car il n'existe pas (encore) de meta-théorie qui rende compte de toute la complexité de la motivation humaine.
Son approche est résolument pragmatique : elle part de l'observation du réel, elle est confirmée par l'expérience en labo et sur le terrain.
Elle a pu être validée dans des domaines divers : éducation, santé, sport, entreprise.
Ses concepts les plus connus sont :
- la distinction entre la motivation intrinsèque et la motivation extrinsèque,
et dans les motivations extrinsèques, la distinction entre différents types de motivation ayant des impacts spécifiques sur la persévérance, le bien-être, l'efficience… ; - les besoins psychologiques de base universels que sont
. l'autonomie (vouloir ce qu'on fait),
. le sentiment de compétence et de croissance de compétence,
. le sentiment d'appartenance sociale dans des relations équilibrées (compter pour les autres, compter sur les autres),
besoins sans lesquels la démotivation s'installe si rapidement…
Une des (nombreuses) choses que je retiens d'utile pour la pratique de l'auto-motivation est que certains types de motivation peuvent être très… motivants, sans pour autant être très épanouissants.
Il est alors intéressant de faire le tri entre les motivations qui vont apporter plus de vie et celles qui risquent de l'affadir, de la rabougrir.
Mise en pratique #8
Je vous propose de consulter le Mooc sur la SDT : "Introduction to Self-Determination Theory", en vous connectant sur le site de Coursera et en vous inscrivant à ce cours : https://www.coursera.org/learn/self-determination-theory
C'est gratuit. Même si Coursera propose des options payantes, la consultation du cours est gratuite.
Voici ma sélection de vidéos intéressantes dans ce cours. Toutes sont intéressantes d'ailleurs, mais l'intégralité des vidéos est un peu indigeste.
- Vidéos 1 et 2 : 15 minutes au total. Elles posent les bases de ce dont parle cette théorie de la motivation et du bien-être.
- Vidéo 4, 11 minutes, Influence des récompenses sur la motivation intrinsèque. Ça m'a considérablement marqué, en tant que parent et enseignant.
- Vidéo 24, 9 minutes, Motivation et démotivation au travail. Utile dans le monde professionnel.
Si l'anglais vous est difficile, passez au sous-titrage en français.
Évitez les sous-titrages en anglais. Ils ont été générés par une IA, peut-être corrigés par un humain mais seulement à la surface, et il y a souvent des bizarreries dans la transcription.
Appuyez-vous plutôt sur l'audio anglais et les sous-titres en français.
Bon visionnage !
Et ensuite ?
Je mentionnais plus haut que la SDT distingue des types de motivation qui sont plus ou moins épanouissants.
Je vais commencer par le type de motivation le plus connu : la motivation intrinsèque.
On en reparle dans le "Motivation tip #9"
Tous les "Motivation tips" sont à retrouver →ici←
Pour aller plus loin
Outre la ressource déjà donnée ci-dessus (mooc), voici les différentes "propositions", c'est-à-dire "éléments tels que compris à l'heure actuelle à partir de la recherche" de la théorie de l'autodétermination.
Le langage est un peu technique. Dans les "Motivations Tips" suivants, j'apporterai des précisions sur les concepts clés de la SDT qui rendront ce qui suit beaucoup plus clair.
La SDT ne traite pas seulement de motivation, mais plus globalement de bien-être, certaines propositions de la théorie sont donc axées sur le bien-être.
Enfin, c'est en anglais :-)
Cognitive Evaluation Theory
Proposition I
External events relevant to the initiation or regulation of behavior will affect a person's intrinsic motivation to the extent that they influence the perceived locus of causality for the behavior.
Events that promote a more external perceived locus of causality or have a functional significance of control will thwart autonomy and undermine intrinsic motivation,
whereas those that promote a more internal perceived locus of causality will increase feelings of autonomy and enhance intrinsic motivation.
Proposition II
External events will also affect a person's intrinsic motivation for an activity to the extent that the events influence the person's perceived competence at the activity.
Events that promote greater perceived competence enhance intrinsic motivation by satisfying the person's need for competence.
Events that meaningfully diminish perceived competence undermine intrinsic motivation.
Proposition III
External events relevant to the initiation and regulation of behavior have three aspects, each with a functional significance.
The informational aspect, which conveys information about self-determined competence, facilitates an internal perceived locus of causality and perceived competence, thus supporting intrinsic motivation.
The controlling aspect, which pressures people to think, feel, or behave in particular ways, facilitates an external perceived locus of causality, thereby diminishing intrinsic motivation.
The amotivating aspect, which signifies incompetence to obtain outcomes and/or a lack of value for them, undermines both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and promotes amotivation.
The relative salience of these three aspects for the person, which can be influenced by factors in the interpersonal context and in the person, determines the functional significance of the event, and thus its impact on intrinsic motivation.
Proposition IV
Interpersonal contexts can be characterized in terms of the degree to which the motivational climate tends to be controlling, autonomy supportive, or amotivating.
This quality of the overarching interpersonal climate both directly impacts motivation and the likely interpretation or functional significance of specific events, with corresponding effects on intrinsic motivation.
Environments that are most facilitating of intrinsic motivation are those that support people's basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness.
Proposition V
Intrapersonal events that bear on the initiation and regulation of behavior can differ in their functional significance.
Accordingly, internally informational events are those that facilitate intrinsic motivation by facilitating an internal perceived locus of causality and perceived competence;
internally controlling events are those experienced as pressure toward specific outcomes and facilitate an external perceived locus of causality, thereby undermining intrinsic motivation;
and internally amotivating events are those that make salient someone's incompetence and inability to attain desired outcomes, thereby diminishing both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
Organismic Integration Theory
Proposition I
The process of organismic integration inclines humans naturally to internalize extrinsic motivations that are endorsed by significant others.
However, the process of internalization can function more versus less effectively, resulting in different degrees of internalization that are the basis for regulations that differ in perceived locus of causality and thus the extent to which they are autonomous.
Proposition II
Internalization of extrinsic motivation can be described in terms of a continuum that spans from relatively heteronomous or controlled regulation to relatively autonomous self-regulation.
External regulation describes extrinsic motivation that remains dependent on external controls;
introjected regulation describes extrinsic motivation that is based on internal controls involving affective and self-esteem contingencies;
regulation through identification describes extrinsic motivation that has been accepted as personally valued and important;
and integrated regulation describes extrinsic motivation that is fully self-endorsed and has been well assimilated with other identifications, values, and needs.
Regulations that lie further along this continuum from external toward integrated are more fully internalized, and the resulting behaviors are more autonomous.
Proposition III
Supports for the basic needs for competence, relatedness, and autonomy facilitate the internalization and integration of non-intrinsically motivated behaviors.
To the extent that the context is controlling, and/or relatedness or competence needs are thwarted, internalization, and particularly identification or integrated regulation, will be less likely.
Proposition IV
To the degree that people's behavior is regulated through more autonomous or integrated forms of internalization, they will display greater behavioral persistence at activities, a higher quality of behavior, and more effective performance, especially for more difficult or complex actions.
Proposition V
To the degree that people's behavior is regulated through more integrated forms of internalization, they will have more positive experiences and greater psychological health and well-being.
Causality Orientations Theory
Proposition I
People have three different motivational orientations – called causality orientations – that represent global-level individual differences. Causality orientations are propensities to focus on certain aspects of environments and inner capacities that concern motivation and the causes of their behaviors.
These are labeled the autonomy orientation, the controlled orientation, and the impersonal orientation.
These orientations affect people's situation-specific motivation, as well as their general need satisfaction, behavior, and experience.
Proposition II
Causality orientations are developmental outcomes that are influenced over time by biological and social-contextual factors that impact satisfaction of the basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
To the degree that individuals' social environments are substantially and persistently autonomy-supportive, controlling, or amotivating over time, people will, respectively, tend to develop strong autonomy orientations, controlled orientations, and impersonal orientations.
Proposition III
Causality orientations affect people's effectiveness in engaging with their surroundings, as well as their psychological well-being, as mediated by types of domain- or situation- specific motivations and need satisfactions.
The autonomy orientation promotes greater integration of personality, which strengthens itself and promotes effective performance and well-being.
The controlled orientation promotes introjection and rigidity, which strengthens itself and promotes less effective self-regulation and less positive experience.
The impersonal orientation promotes the experience of ineffectance and amotivation, thereby strengthening itself and leading to the least effective performance and lower well-being outcomes.
Proposition IV
All individuals have all three causality orientations to some degree.
Subtle cues in the environment may make different orientations more salient at that time and place.
Thus, it is possible to prime people's motivational orientations such that their behavior and experience will be significantly affected by the primed motivation event if that orientation is, in general, relatively weak.
Basic Psychological Needs Theory
Proposition Ia
There are three basic psychological needs, the satisfaction of which is essential to optimal development, integrity, and well-being.
These are the needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
Failure to satisfy any of these needs will be manifested in diminished growth, integrity, and wellness.
In addition, need frustration, typically due to the thwarting of these basic needs, is associated with greater ill-being and more impoverished functioning.
Proposition Ib
Psychological need satisfactions and frustrations vary within persons over time, contexts, and social interactions.
Any factor or event that produces variations in need satisfaction or need frustration will also produce variations in wellness, and this principle extends from highly aggregated levels of analysis down to moment-to-moment or situation-to-situation variations in functioning.
Proposition II
Satisfaction of each of the three psychological needs is facilitated by autonomy support, whereas controlling contexts and events can disrupt not only autonomy satisfactions, but relatedness and competence need fulfillments as well.
Proposition III
Because basic psychological need satisfactions are functional requirements for full functioning and wellness, the effects of satisfaction versus frustration of these needs will be evidenced regardless of whether or not people explicitly desire or value the needs, and regardless of their sociocultural context.
Proposition IV
Basic need satisfactions of autonomy, competence, and relatedness will tend to positively relate to one another, especially at an aggregated level of analysis (i.e., across domains, situations, or time).
Proposition V
Deficit needs (such as needs for security and self-esteem) become salient under circumstances of threat, distress, or thwarting of growth needs such as autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
Satisfaction of deficit needs can stave off aspects of ill-being but do not typically contribute to enhanced wellness or flourishing.
That is, deficit needs emerge as most salient under adverse conditions (threat, deprivation, exclusion, etc.), but they are not aspects of ongoing thriving, and their satisfactions may set the stage for, but do not necessarily promote, optimal human functioning.
Proposition VI
Subjective vitality is based on more than physical nutrients; it also reflects satisfaction versus thwarting of basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
Therefore, both externally controlling and self-controlling states are expected to deplete vitality, whereas basic psychological needs satisfactions are expected to enhance it.
Proposition VII
Other factors aside, meaningful exposure to living nature has a positive effect on subjective vitality relative to exposure to non-natural, built environments without living elements, and this relation is mediated in part by basic psychological needs.
Proposition VIII
Mindfulness, defined as the open and receptive awareness of what is occurring both within people and within their context, facilitates greater autonomy and more integrated self-regulation, as well as greater basic psychological need satisfaction, which contributes to greater well-being.
Goal Contents Theory
Proposition I
Intrinsic goals are defined as those most directly associated with the pursuit of what is inherently valued, such as close relationships, personal growth, and contributing to one's community.
Extrinsic goals, in contrast, are those focused on instrumental outcomes, such as money, fame, power, or outward attractiveness.
These goals can therefore be understood as lying along an axis from intrinsic to extrinsic.
Proposition II
The more an individual values or prioritizes extrinsic goals relative to intrinsic goals, the lower will be his or her well-being.
The more a person puts relative priority or value on intrinsic goals, the better the person's wellness outcomes.
Proposition III
These relations between intrinsic and extrinsic goals and wellness will largely be a function of (i.e. mediated by) satisfaction and frustration of basic psychological needs.
In general, intrinsic goal pursuits are more satisfying of basic psychological needs.
In addition, effects may also be a function of the regulatory basis of goal pursuits, as extrinsic goals will, on average, tend to be less autonomously regulated than intrinsic goals.
Proposition IV
Progress and success at attaining extrinsic goals will tend to be associated with less enhanced wellness relative to progress and attainment of intrinsic goals.
Progress and attainment of intrinsic goals is predicted to yield especially enhanced wellness.
These effects are largely mediated by basic psychological need satisfaction.
Proposition V
Individuals whose basic psychological needs have been neglected or frustrated in development are more prone to adopt need substitutes, such as extrinsic life goals, as being personally important.
To the extent that they do so, their well-being will be compromised.
Proposition VI
Motivators can frame goals in more extrinsic versus intrinsic terms.
The latter will be more likely to produce sustained engagement and, ultimately, wellness.
Proposition VII
Because all goals can be more or less linked to need satisfaction, the relation of personal goals of any type to wellness-related outcomes is a function of (or is mediated by) need satisfactions.
Proposition VIII
Mindfulness, in promoting more integrated functioning, also conduces to a greater focus on intrinsic goal contents relative to extrinsic goal contents.
Relationships Motivation Theory
Proposition I
People have a basic psychological need for relatedness, the satisfaction of which is essential to growth, integrity, and wellness, and the frustration of which can play a causal role in ill-being.
Proposition II
High-quality relationships are facilitated not only by having close end enduring social contact with a partner but also by experiencing autonomous motivation within and for that contact.
Autonomous motivation – that is, the individual's authentic willingness to participate in the relationship – contributes to high satisfaction and greater psychological wellness in both parties within that dyad.
Proposition IIIa
Within relationships the satisfactions of all three basic psychological needs for relatedness, autonomy, and competence contribute to, and in fact define, higher quality relationships and facilitate greater relationship satisfaction, attachment security, and well-being.
Proposition IIIb
Within relationships the frustration of psychological needs for relatedness, autonomy, or competence contributes to relationship dysfunction and defense and greater relationship dissatisfaction, insecurity, and ill-being.
Proposition IVa
Individuals who experience autonomy support from their partners within a close relationship will be more willing to emotionally rely on those partners and to turn to the partners for support.
Proposition IVb
Individuals who experience autonomy support within a close relationship will be more able to "be themselves" – that is, – to be authentic and transparent and to function closer to their own ideals.
Proposition V
Autonomy-supportive partners in close relationships tend to experience a sense of mutuality – that is, when one partner experiences autonomy or autonomy support, the other is more likely to experience it as well – and the greater the degree of mutuality in autonomy or autonomy support within a relationship, the greater is the relationship satisfaction, attachment security, and well-being of both partners.
Proposition VI
Although, inherently, satisfactions of the basic psychological needs are complementary and positive, if the social environment turns any two against each other – for example, if an individual's relational partner requires the individual to relinquish satisfaction of one need (e.g., autonomy) in order to get satisfaction of another (e.g., relatedness) – the individual will experience a poorer relationship quality with that partner and a lower level of wellness.
Proposition VII
To the degree that an individual in a relationship relates to the partner more as an object, stereotype, or thing, rather than as a person intrinsically worthy of respect, the partner will accordingly experience thwarting of the basic psychological needs, resulting in a lower quality relationship and poorer well-being.