International Journal of Psychology, 2014

DOI: 10.1002/ijop.12110

The importance of autonomy support and the mediating

role of work motivation for well-being: Testing
self-determination theory in a Chinese work organisation
Youyan Nie1 , Bee Leng Chua1 , Alexander Seeshing Yeung2 , Richard M. Ryan2,3 ,
and Wai Yen Chan1
1 Psychological Studies Academic Group, National Institute of Education, Nanyang
Technological University, Singapore
2 Insitute for Positive Psychology and Education, Australian Catholic University, Strathfield,

NSW, Australia
3 Department of Clinical and Social Sciences in Psychology, University of Rochester, Rochester

NY, USA

W e examine relations between perceived organisational autonomy support and different types of work motivation
and well-being outcomes in 266 teachers from two government schools in China. We hypothesised that greater
autonomy support would be associated with more autonomous forms of employee motivation, and that teacher motivation
would in turn mediate the effects of autonomy support on indicators of work well-being (i.e., job satisfaction, work stress
and physical ill symptoms). Results generally supported the hypothesised relations between perceived autonomy support
and SDT’s five types of motivations. Findings also showed that perceived autonomy support predicted job satisfaction
directly and indirectly through the mediating roles of intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, introjected regulation and
external regulation. Perceived autonomy support predicted work stress directly and indirectly through the mediating roles
of external regulation and amotivation. Autonomy support also predicted illness symptoms via the mediating roles of
intrinsic motivation, introjected regulation and amotivation. The current findings highlight how perceived organisational
support for autonomy relates to motivational differences in a Chinese work context, and the potential relevance of
autonomy support for employee well-being.

Keywords: Self-determination theory; Motivation; Well-being.

Work is a very important part of life, consuming much
time in one’s lifespan and for many, much investment
of energy and concern. As such, the role of work in
contributing to individuals’ well-being and quality of
life is gaining increasing attention in research (e.g.,
Vansteenkiste, Lens, de Witte, & Feather, 2005). The
purpose of the current study is to contribute to the under-
standing of employees’ job satisfaction and well-being
within a Chinese work organisation using motivation
constructs based in self-determination theory (SDT;
Ryan & Deci, 2000).
SDT is a motivation theory that focuses on people’s
volitional motivation—specifically the degree to which
they experience their actions as autonomous (i.e., acting
based on choice, interest, pleasure or values) versus
controlled (i.e., acting based on rewards, punishment,
sense of guilty or obligation). This theory has generated
much empirical research in organisational literature,
with findings showing that more autonomous forms of
motivation are generally associated with more positive
outcomes (e.g., self-regulation, persistence, commitment,
job satisfaction) and that autonomy support can promote
autonomous forms of motivation (e.g., Fernet, Guay,
Senécal, & Austin, 2012).
The variability in values and behaviours across dif-
ferent cultures has been well observed and this has led
researchers to consider social integration, motivation and
well-being issues from cultural perspectives. The notion
of autonomy support bringing forth beneficial work out-
comes has been an area that attracts researchers across
cultures. Some researchers argue that, culturally valued or
not, behaviour based on more autonomous motives will

Correspondence should be addressed to Youyan Nie, Psychological Studies Academic Group, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technolog-
ical University, Singapore 639798, Singapore. (E-mail: youyan.nie@nie.edu.sg).

© 2014 International Union of Psychological Science

2 NIE ET AL.
foster greater persistence, performance and well-being
outcomes than controlled motives (e.g., Chirkov, Ryan,
Kim, & Kaplan, 2003). Autonomy support is therefore
expected to lead to a range of positive outcomes. In con-
trast, some scholars have suggested that because peo-
ple from collectivist cultures value interdependence they
will place lower value on individual autonomy, and may
not realise the same benefits from autonomy support that
have been identified in Western samples (e.g., Kitayama,
Snibbe, Markus, & Suzuki, 2004; Markus, Kitayama,
& Heiman, 1996; Schwartz, 1994). The current study
aims to contribute to the current research by testing
the relations among autonomy support, motivation and
well-being in a Chinese (mainland) cultural context.
Chinese culture is chosen in the current study because
China is a fast developing country with a long history
of Confucianism with values emphasising group orienta-
tion, interpersonal harmony, acceptance of authority and
benevolence (e.g., Liem & Nie, 2008) but not auton-
omy in any explicit way. It is therefore unclear whether
SDT is applicable to Chinese organisational contexts with
adult employees. Accordingly this study examines the
five different types of motivation specified within SDT
in a Chinese organisational context. More specifically
we examine a model based on SDT in which perceived
organisational autonomy support is associated with both
autonomous forms of motivation and well-being; and
whether the different types of motivation mediate the rela-
tions between perceived autonomy support and employee
well-being.
Self-determination and different types
of motivation
According to SDT, there are distinct types of motivation
that vary in terms of their degree of self-determination.
The theory began with investigations of intrinsic motiva-
tion, which is characterised by a high degree of auton-
omy. Intrinsic motivation refers to behaviours arising
from inherent interest or enjoyment of a task itself.
This type of motivation is reflected in people’s nat-
ural tendency to seek novelty and challenges, and to
explore and learn for its own sake. As a prototypically
autonomous form of motivation, it represents the top end
of the self-determination continuum. At the lowest end of
the self-determination continuum is amotivation, which
refers to a state of lacking any intention to act. Other
types of motivation lie in between. These other types of
motivation can be categorised as extrinsic motivation, in
that unlike intrinsic motivation, the motive to act is oper-
ationally separable from the action itself. According to
SDT, extrinsic motives vary in terms of the level of auton-
omy entailed in behaviour regulation.
The most controlled form of extrinsic motivation is
labelled external regulation, and concerns behaviours that
are initiated and maintained by contingencies external
to the person such as rewards or threats of punishments.
External regulation is characterised by low autonomy,
and has been related to negative wellness outcomes (Ryan
& Deci, 2000). Somewhat less controlled is introjected
regulation, which is represented by behaviours driven by
internal rather than external rewards and punishments.
In introjected regulation, the person is motivated to
avoid self-conscious emotions such as shame, guilt and
self-critical feelings, and to obtain positive self-related
affects and appraisals. A more autonomous form of
motivation would be identified regulation, in which the
person is motivated because the behaviour is congruent
with the individual’s personal goals and values. In short,
SDT specifies five types of motivation (intrinsic motiva-
tion, identified regulation, introjected regulation, external
regulation and amotivation) in a descending order of
relative autonomy or self-determination.
There has been considerable evidence of the ordered
nature of these motives along a continuum of autonomy.
This evidence has primarily come from domains such as
sport and education (Ryan & Connell, 1989), and has
included samples from Asian contexts (e.g., Yamauchi
& Tanaka, 1998). Nonetheless there has been a paucity
of studies in Chinese contexts, especially Chinese work
organisations.
In the current study, we thus investigated if this con-
tinuum of autonomy manifests in the context of teacher
employees in two large Chinese government-run schools.
As predicted by SDT, we expected a consistent trend
depicting gradual changes in the correlations between
these five types of motivation with both perceived
autonomy support from managers and with employee
well-being outcomes. For example, there should, for
most wellness-related outcome variables, be a gradual
correlation change from more to less positive relations
between autonomy support and identified, introjected
and external regulation, respectively.
Perceived autonomy support, employee
motivation and well-being
Besides distinguishing different types of motivation in
terms of their degree of autonomy, SDT also highlights
the importance of an autonomy supportive environment in
facilitating or undermining different types of motivation
and personal well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2000). In gen-
eral, perceived autonomy support should facilitate inter-
nalisation and thus promotes more autonomous forms
of behavioural regulation. A great deal of research has
shown the importance of autonomy support in promoting
autonomous motivation and well-being (Chirkov & Ryan,
2001; Deci et al., 2001; Gagné, Ryan, & Bargmann, 2003;
Kins, Beyers, Soenens, & Vansteenkiste, 2009; Pelletier,
Fortier, Vallerand, & Brière, 2001; Taylor & Ntoumanis,
© 2014 International Union of Psychological Science

2007). However, few studies have explored how perceived
autonomy support is related to the five different types
of motivation. Extending previous studies, the current
research will examine the differential relations between
perceived autonomy support and the five types of moti-
vation described above. In addition, we investigate how
autonomy support directly and/or indirectly predicts job
satisfaction, work stress and illness symptoms.
Studies have shown that the more autonomous one’s
motivation is, the more the person is likely to experience
greater well-being. Many of these empirical studies have
combined different types of motivation into a single index
(i.e., autonomous index) or further classified them into
two categories—autonomous motivation (the combina-
tion of intrinsic motivation and identified regulation), and
controlled motivation (the combination of introjected and
external regulation) (e.g., Fernet et al., 2012; Kins et al.,
2009; Vansteenkiste et al., 2005). These studies are valu-
able in their depiction of the importance of autonomous
motivation in learning and work organisations. Yet these
findings often provide limited information on how the
distinct types of motivation influence well-being. This dif-
ferentiation is important because first, intrinsic motivation
and identified motivation, which are usually classified as
autonomous motivations, could have differential effects
on well-being and performance. Intrinsic motivation
has been found to predict well-being whereas identified
motivation predicted academic performance. Second,
introjected motivation and external motivation, which
are usually classified as controlled motivation, could also
show differential effects on well-being. Research shows
that external regulation consistently has positive relations
with maladaptive outcomes (e.g., depression, anxiety)
and negative relations with adaptive outcomes (e.g., pos-
itive affect, quality of life). Most importantly, introjected
regulation, which represents regulations that are inter-
nalised and yet not well integrated, have shown positive
correlations with both negative affect and positive affect
(see Ng et al., 2012 for a meta-analysis). Third, identified
and introjected regulations have different relations with
decision-making strategies, emotions and behaviours
after controlling for each other’s variance (partial corre-
lation) (Koestner, Losier, Vallerand, & Carducci, 1996).
Thus while both identification and introjection are asso-
ciated with effort (Ryan & Connell, 1989), introjection
has been associated with some undesirable outcomes,
whereas identification tends to predict positive outcomes
(e.g., Pelletier et al., 2001). Therefore, in the current
study we attempt to examine the predictive relations of
all five types of motivation with well-being, treating them
as distinct types of motivation with their own unique
predictive relationships on a range of outcomes.
Based on our review of numerous studies on well-
being (e.g., Baard, Deci, & Ryan, 2004; Vansteenkiste
et al., 2005), we selected three indicators of work-related
well-being (i.e., job satisfaction, work stress, illness
© 2014 International Union of Psychological Science
MOTIVATION AND WELL-BEING 3
symptoms) which have been widely used as well-being
indicators. These provide adequate coverage of the
well-being construct (i.e., positive and negative aspects,
as well as psychological and physical aspects) (e.g., Ng
et al., 2012). We hypothesised that intrinsic motivation
will show the strongest relations with well-being (i.e.,
positively related to positive indicators and negatively
related to negative indicators of well-being), followed by
identified regulation. External regulation and amotivation
will show negative relations with well-being indicators
(i.e., negatively related to the positive indicators and pos-
itively related to the negative indicators in well-being).
Finally, introjected regulation will be associated with
both positive consequences and negative consequences.
In practical terms, research on the relative associations
between each motivation type with outcomes may pro-
vide insights regarding how specific types of motivation
may enhance or undermine specific well-being outcomes.
Motivations as mediators in the Chinese context
In the current study, we also explore the psychological
mechanisms that may account for the hypothesised rela-
tion between perceived autonomy support and well-being.
Since previous studies have shown that perceived auton-
omy support is the antecedent of different types of moti-
vation and different types of motivation also have differ-
ent consequences for wellness(e.g., Pelletier et al., 2001;
Richer, Blanchard, & Vallerand, 2002), it is reasonable
to hypothesise that different types of motivation may
mediate the relations between autonomy support and
well-being. However, empirical studies testing the media-
tion effects of motivation on perceived autonomy support
and well-being are scarce in Chinese contexts. Hence the
current study also attempts to fill this gap in the literature.
SDT postulates that an autonomy supportive envi-
ronment should have beneficial effects on motivation
and well-being across different cultural contexts because
fundamental psychological needs (e.g., needs for auton-
omy) are universal (Chua, Wong, & Koestner, 2014).
Some studies in Chinese learning contexts have sup-
ported the beneficial effects of motivation on learning
(e.g., Zhou, Ma, & Deci, 2009).Yet this claim is con-
troversial because cross-cultural studies have shown that
cultures vary greatly in their explicit valuing of autonomy
(Schwartz, 1994) and, in some views, support for auton-
omy may be important only in cultures in which auton-
omy is explicitly valued. Therefore, a driving question of
current study is whether perceived autonomy support is
still desirable or beneficial in a cultural context that may
not explicitly value the importance of autonomy. Specif-
ically, the current study extends research by examining
whether perceived autonomy support and the five types
of motivation show beneficial relations with employee
well-being in a Chinese work context using a sample of
teachers in a Chinese government school organisation.
4 NIE ET AL.
Significance of the present study
The present study will contribute to the existing liter-
ature by providing a deeper understanding of the dif-
ferentiated impact of different types of motivation in
well-being. Specifically, the present study will examine
the differential relations of all five types of work motiva-
tion specified within the SDT continuum with well-being
both at the univariate and multivariate levels, which has
been seldom reported in previous studies. In addition
this research focuses on the positive impact of perceived
autonomy support on employees’ wellness and job satis-
faction. Finally, by focusing on teacher employees within
a Chinese government school organisation, this research
further examines the applicability of SDT-derived con-
structs to Asian cultural contexts.
METHOD
Participants
Participants were 266 teachers from two government mid-
dle schools in Hebei province, China. Ages ranged from
23 to 60 (median = 33 years). Participants included 76
males and 188 females (two teachers did not indicate gen-
der). Of these teachers, 85.7% held a Bachelor’s degree.
Procedures
Two trained researchers administered the surveys to the
teachers from the two schools in their respective school
auditoriums during working hours. Each teacher took
about 15 minutes to complete the survey. In accordance
with ethics procedures, participants were told that their
responses would be confidential and anonymous and that
they were allowed to withdraw from the study at any point
without penalty.
Measures
All items were rated on 5-point Likert scales (1 = strongly
disagree to 5 = strongly agree). All measures on the
questionnaire were translated from English into Chinese
through a translation and back-translation procedure coor-
dinated by the first author.
Perceived work autonomy support
A 13-item scale assessed participants’ perceived work
autonomy support from their direct supervisor/manager.
This scale was adapted from Baard et al. (2004)’s work
climate questionnaire. The original scale consisted of
15 items. Two items were dropped due to low factor
loadings. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted
to examine the factorial structure of the construct. A
TABLE 1
Fit indices for 5-factor, 3-factor and 1-factor models for teacher
motivation scale
5-Factor model 3-Factor model 1-Factor model
χ2 155.09 705.56 963.31
N 266 266 266
df 76 87 90
TLI .95 .673 .554
CFI .97 .729 .618
RMSEA .06 .164 .191
one-factor structure provided a good fit for the data, χ2 (59,
N = 266) = 144.20, TLI = .97, CFI = .97, RMSEA = .07.
The scale showed good internal consistency reliability,
α = .96
Teacher work motivation scale
Teacher work motivation scale was adapted from the
work tasks motivation scale for teachers (Fernet, Senécal,
Guay, Marsh, & Dowson, 2008). There were 5 subscales
to measure intrinsic motivation, identified regulation,
introjected regulation, external regulation and amoti-
vation. Each scale had three items. We compared the
5-factor model with theoretically plausible 3-factor and
1-factor CFA models, and found that the 5-factor model
provided the best fit for the data. These fit indices are
presented in Table 1. The internal consistency was good
(α = .92 for intrinsic motivation, α = .82 for identified
regulation, α = .77 for introjected regulation, α = .75 for
external regulation, α = .85 for amotivation).
Work-related well-being
Work-related well-being was measured with three
scales (i.e., job satisfaction, work stress, illness symp-
toms) adapted from Pettegrew and Wolf (1982). These
scales were all constructed relevant to teachers’ school
work. Job satisfaction is a domain-specific satisfaction
about work. The job satisfaction scale included 4 items
(e.g., I am satisfied with my job). The work stress scale
included 8 items about the stress related to work in
the school (e.g., trying to complete the school work
on time causes me a lot of stress). The illness symp-
toms scale included 4 items about the general illness
symptoms related to work (e.g., I have trouble getting
to sleep or staying asleep due to the work problem).
A three-factor confirmatory factor analysis provided a
good fit for the data, (96, N = 266) = 138.49, TLI = .96,
CFI = .97, RMSEA = .04. The internal consistency was
good (α = .75 for job satisfaction, α = .81 for work stress,
α = .82 for ill symptoms).
© 2014 International Union of Psychological Science

Test the presence of common method
variance
When all data are self-reported and collected through
the same questionnaire during the same period of time,
common method variance may be a concern. To test
whether a substantial amount of common method vari-
ance is present, the unrotated principal component analy-
sis (Harman’s one-factor test) and principal component
analysis with promax rotation were conducted for 44
items. Both revealed the presence of 9 distinct factors
with eigenvalue greater than 1.0, rather than a single fac-
tor. The 9 factors together accounted for 68.46% of the
total variance; the first (largest) factor did not account
for a majority of the variance (33.70%). Thus, no gen-
eral factor is apparent. Moreover, the confirmatory fac-
tor analysis showed that the single-factor model did not
fit the data well, χ2 (594, N = 266) = 3212.4, p < .001,
CFI = .612; TLI = .589; RMSEA = .129. Although the
results of these analyses do not preclude the possibility
of common method variance, they suggest that common
method variance was limited.
Control variables
A number of work-related variables and demographics
were considered as control variables, including gender
(0 = female; 1 = male), age, educational level, occupa-
tional position level, teaching experience and school
(one school was coded as 0 and the other was coded as
1). However, only gender and school were controlled in
subsequent analyses because (a) gender was correlated
with introjected regulation external regulation and (b)
school was correlated with perceived autonomy support,
intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, external regu-
lation, amotivation, job satisfaction and gender. The other
potential control variables were not significantly related
with perceived autonomy support, work motivation or
the well-being outcomes.
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
Data analysis
We calculated the means for all the variables to construct
the measured latent variables.1 Descriptive statistics
and zero-order Pearson correlation coefficients were
computed and inspected. Causal steps recommended
by MacKinnon, Lockwood, Hoffman, West, and Sheets
(2002) were performed to demonstrate mediation. Finally,
Path analysis was conducted to examine the significant
1 It is recommended to use summated scale scores rather than factor scores if generalisability is desired because it can be easily replicated across
studies (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2006).
© 2014 International Union of Psychological Science
MOTIVATION AND WELL-BEING 5
direct and indirect relations among the perceived auton-
omy support, different types of teacher motivation, and
well-being indicators.
Multivariate normality test (Mardia’ coefficient) was
conducted and the results showed that kurtosis = 32.882,
critical value = 18.985. Based on a cut-off value of 5 (e.g.,
Byrne, 2010), the assumption of multivariate normality
is rejected. Therefore, bootstrapping was applied using
the MPlus software to obtain estimates of standard errors
as bootstrap approach is less biased when the underlying
distribution is non-normal (e.g., Preacher & Hayes, 2008).
The number of bootstrap samples was set as 200 using
Maximum Likelihood estimator.
Descriptive statistics and zero-order
correlations
Descriptive statistics and zero-order correlations among
the variables are presented in Table 2. Consistent with
SDT, the correlation coefficients for five types of moti-
vation with autonomy support and job satisfaction show
that (a) intrinsic motivation has the highest positive
correlations with autonomy support and job satisfaction,
(b) amotivation had highest negative correlations with
them, and (c) there was a gradual correlation change
from positive to negative with identified, introjected
and external regulation, respectively. Based on the
degree of self-determination from highest to lowest,
the rank order was as follows: Intrinsic motivation with
the highest positive correlation with perceived auton-
omy support (r = .56), identified regulation (r = .48),
introjected regulation (r = .42), external regulation
with a negative correlation (r = −.38), and amotivation
with the greatest negative correlation (r = −.49). The
reversed pattern was obtained for work stress and ill
symptoms.
Mediation analysis
Mediation analysis was performed using the causal steps
recommended by MacKinnon, Lockwood, Hoffman,
West and Sheets (2002). In the first step, we demon-
strated significant direct effects of perceived autonomy
support for all three outcomes of job satisfaction, work
stress and ill symptoms, when all indirect paths are con-
strained to zero. In the second step, we demonstrated that
perceived autonomy support significantly predicted the
five mediators. In the final step, we allowed all indirect
paths to be freely estimated and demonstrated significant
indirect effects. At the same time, the direct effects are
considerably weaker. Table 3 shows the results of the
6 NIE ET AL.

TABLE 2
Descriptive statistics and zero-order correlations

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1 Perceived work autonomy support 3.33 .78 —

2 Intrinsic motivation 3.61 .79 .56** —
3 Identified regulation 3.76 .67 .48** .60** —
4 Introjected regulation 3.38 .74 .42** .45** .48** —
5 External regulation 2.75 .74 −.38** −.30** −.31** −.07 —
6 Amotivation 2.56 .78 −.49** −.53** −.50** −.36** .46** —
7 Job satisfaction 3.51 .67 .53** .66** .56** .47** −.34** −.50** —
8 Work stress 3.04 .66 −.36** −.31** −.30** −.12 .36** .41** −.28** –
9 Ill symptoms 2.42 .82 −.20** −.30** −.15* −.03 .19** .32** −.22** .45** —
10 Gender −.03 .04 .04 .13* .16* .09 .03 .02 .04 —
11 School .18** .17** .21** .10 −.12* −.16* .18** .04 −.04 −.22** —
* p < .05. ** p < .01.

mediation analysis and the test of direct effects, total
indirect effects and specific indirect effects.
Path analysis
The path analysis was conducted and all the signifi-
cant regression coefficients were kept in the path model
and all the non-significant regression coefficients were
removed from the model (i.e., constrained to zero in
the model). The final path model fits the data well,
χ2 (23, N = 266) = 24.934, Bootstrap p = .354, TLI = .995,
CFI = .998, RMSEA = .018. The path coefficients for the
final path model are presented in Figure 1. Key observa-
tions of the model are highlighted below.
First, perceived autonomy support predicted employee
work motivation. The results showed that perceived
autonomy support was a positive predictor of intrinsic
motivation, identified regulation and introjected regu-
lation. Perceived autonomy support was, in contrast,
negatively associated with external regulation, and
amotivation.
Second, teachers’ work motivation was associated
with work-related well-being in generally expected ways.
For job satisfaction, intrinsic motivation, identified reg-
ulation and external regulation were significant positive
predictors. Introjected regulation was unexpectedly pos-
itively associated with these wellness outcomes as well.
For work stress, both external regulation and amotivation
were predictors. Illness symptoms were predicted by both
introjected motivation and amotivation, and were nega-
tively related with intrinsic motivation.
Third, perceived autonomy support predicted well-
being directly and indirectly through the mediating
role of teacher work motivation. Perceived autonomy
support directly predicted job satisfaction. In addition,
perceived autonomy support also indirectly predicted
job satisfaction through intrinsic motivation, identified
regulation, introjected regulation and external regulation.
Perceived autonomy support directly predicted work
stress. In addition, perceived autonomy support also
indirectly predicted work stress through external regu-
lation and amotivation. Perceived autonomy support did
not directly predict illness symptoms, but it indirectly
predicted it through introjected regulation, amotivation
and (negatively) intrinsic motivation.
DISCUSSION
In this study we examined the relations of five types
of motivation, specified with SDT (Ryan & Deci, 2000)
as lying along a continuum of relative autonomy, with
perceived work climate and well-being outcomes in a
Chinese work organisation. Data from teachers in two
public schools revealed a systematic pattern in correla-
tions. The more autonomous the type of motivation, the
stronger its positive relations with both perceived auton-
omy support and job satisfaction. Conversely, there is a
reversed progressing pattern of correlations to both work
stress and illness symptoms. This pattern has provided
empirical evidence to support SDT’s claim of five types of
motivation varying in terms of autonomy, as well as their
relations with important workplace outcomes. These find-
ings extend previous research by delineating in a Chinese
work organisation how each motivation type relates at a
univariate level to various outcomes. The results also sup-
ported our hypotheses concerning the meditational role of
these motives in helping to explain the relations between
autonomy supportive work environments and employee
outcomes, which replicates findings conducted in West-
ern teacher (e.g., Pelletier et al., 2001) and employee (e.g.,
Richer et al., 2002) settings.
The beneficial roles of autonomy support
The present findings support the beneficial roles of
autonomy support in promoting internalised forms of
motivation (intrinsic motivation, identified regulation and

© 2014 International Union of Psychological Science

 MOTIVATION AND WELL-BEING 7

TABLE 3
Mediation analysis using bootstrap standard errors

Standardised effect p-Valuea

Step 1
Direct effects
Perceived autonomy support → Job Satisfaction .522 <.001
Perceived autonomy support → Work Stress −.374 <.001
Perceived autonomy support → Ill Symptoms −.214 <.001
Step 2
Mediations regressed on predictors
Perceived autonomy support → Intrinsic Motivation .554 <.001
Perceived autonomy support → Identified Regulation .482 <.001
Perceived autonomy support → Introjected Regulation .420 <.001
Perceived autonomy support → External Regulation −.376 <.001
Perceived autonomy support → Amotivation −.494 <.001
Step 3
Direct effects
Perceived autonomy support → Job Satisfaction .123 .058
Perceived autonomy support → Work Stress −.144 .030
Perceived autonomy support → Ill Symptoms −.014 .867
Indirect Effects of Perceived Autonomy Support → Job Satisfaction .408 <.001
Perceived autonomy support → Intrinsic Motivation → Job Satisfaction .212 <.001
Perceived autonomy support → Identified Regulation → Job Satisfaction .066 .038
Perceived autonomy support → Introjected Regulation → Job Satisfaction .062 .007
Perceived autonomy support → External Regulation → Job Satisfaction .033 .167
Perceived autonomy support → Amotivation → Job Satisfaction .035 .301
Indirect Effects of Perceived Autonomy Support → Work Stress −.195 <.001
Perceived autonomy support → Intrinsic Motivation → Work Stress −.032 .523
Perceived autonomy support → Identified Regulation → Work Stress −.049 .270
Perceived autonomy support → Introjected Regulation → Work Stress .044 .138
Perceived autonomy support → External Regulation → Work Stress −.063 .046
Perceived autonomy support → Amotivation → Work Stress −.107 .015
Indirect Effects of Perceived Autonomy Support → Ill Symptoms −.181 .001
Perceived autonomy support → Intrinsic Motivation → Ill Symptoms −.142 .006
Perceived autonomy support → Identified Regulation → Ill Symptoms .035 .405
Perceived autonomy support → Introjected Regulation → Ill Symptoms .061 .039
Perceived autonomy support → External Regulation → Ill Symptoms −.011 .665
Perceived autonomy support → Amotivation → Ill Symptoms −.124 .002
a p-values computed using bootstrap standard errors (number of bootstrap samples = 200).

introjected regulation) as well as job satisfaction as an out-
come. Autonomy support was also directly or indirectly
negatively associated with external regulation, amoti-
vation, work stress and illness symptoms. Thus despite
some claims that autonomy is not highly relevant in
Asian cultures, SDT hypotheses concerning the positive
impact of autonomy support on motivation were largely
supported in this Chinese organisational context. These
findings are also consistent with research conducted
in other cultures supporting the applicability of SDT
(Chirkov & Ryan, 2001; Deci et al., 2001; Gagné et al.,
2003; Pelletier et al., 2001; Taylor & Ntoumanis, 2007).
Although the results generally conformed to expec-
tations, the positive correlation between perceived
autonomy support and introjected regulation was par-
ticularly intriguing given the study context. It seems
likely that the more supportive the perceived work cli-
mate, the more Chinese teachers were apt to endorse
motives of “not disappointing” supervisors or leaders.
This result may reflect the Confucian cultural context,
and represent perhaps a nuanced difference that exists
between Asian and Western organisational contexts. It
is noteworthy, however, that some Western studies have
also shown a similarly modest relation of autonomy
support to introjections, displaying a similar pattern of
correlations. For example, Pelletier et al. (2001) showed
a similar descending pattern of correlations between
perceived coach autonomy support and elite-level Cana-
dian swimmers’ intrinsic, identified, introjected, external
and amotivational motivations, within which introjection
was positively associated with autonomy support and
short-term persistence. It is also worth noting in interpret-
ing the current findings that, although introjection was not
directly related to any negative outcomes at the zero-order
level, in our SEM model it was positively related to both
positive and negative outcomes (i.e., illness symptoms),
suggesting in line with SDT predictions that introjection
is a form of internal motivation that can have internal

© 2014 International Union of Psychological Science

8 NIE ET AL.
Antecedent variable
Mediator
Intrinsic
Motivation
.56**
Identified
.42**
Regulation
.12*
-.16**
Perceived
Autonomy
Support
.40**
-.36**
-.50**
Figure 1. The path analysis results for the direct and indirect (mediating) relations among the perceived autonomy support, different types of teacher
motivation, and well-being indicators.
costs. Nonetheless, both the positive relations of introjec-
tion to job satisfaction and autonomy support suggest that
the meaning and role of introjection within Chinese and
other Asian work contexts warrants further investigation.
Differential predictive relations between work
motivation and well-being
The path analysis results showed that different types of
motivation have different consequences after controlling
for other predictors. Intrinsic motivation seems to be the
most beneficial, demonstrating clear positive predictive
relations with job satisfaction and negative relations to
illness symptoms. That is, if employees are more intrin-
sically motivated, they are more likely to experience job
satisfaction and have less symptoms of illness such as
sleeping problems, headaches and stomach upsets. Iden-
tified regulation is also positively related with job satis-
faction. Yet in this model it was not associated with any
negative consequences (i.e., work stress and illness symp-
toms) after controlling for intrinsic motivation and other
types of motivation. This suggests that identified regu-
lation is not as protective as intrinsic motivation when
considering vocational ill-being. This was not unexpected
because intrinsic motivation is the most autonomous
type of motivation in comparison to the other types of
motivation being investigated (e.g., Ryan & Connell,
1989; Vallerand, 1997)
The results also support the negative roles played
by external regulation and amotivation in well-being.
Consistent with the predictions of SDT, external regu-
lation positively predicted work stress. This means that
Criterion variable
.31
.34**
.23
.53
.16**
Job
Satisfaction
.13*
.24
-.10*
Work
Stress
.16**
.20**
.19
Introjected
Regulation -.20** .13
.14* Ill
.16
Symptoms
External .27**
Regulation
.24
Amotivation
externally regulated teachers tend to experience more
stress in work. Further down the continuum of autonomy,
amotivation predicted both work stress and illness symp-
toms, indicating that teachers’ amotivation is associated
with poor vocational well-being.
The most interesting finding is about introjected
regulation. The path analysis found that it positively pre-
dicted job satisfaction, but also illness symptoms. This
finding suggests that introjected regulation may have
both positive consequences and negative consequences
in terms of its psychological functioning. On one hand,
the people with higher introjected regulation are likely
to experience higher job satisfaction, but on the other
hand, introjected regulation may at the same time bring
ill health. This seems to be consistent with the classic
study conducted by Ryan and Connell (1989) that found
introjected regulation to be positively related to positive
coping strategies, effort and enjoyment but also to anxiety
amplification and cognitive anxiety. Similarly, Koestner
et al. (1996) also found that introjection was positively
related to both expected pleasant emotions and expected
unpleasant emotions. These findings suggest that intro-
jected regulation may have some special consequences
in psychological functioning, different from those asso-
ciated with external regulation (controlled) and identified
regulation (more autonomous) (see Ryan & Deci, 2000),
which differ in terms of the degrees of internalisation
according to the theory. Introjected regulation involves the
partial internalisation of external values; people may take
in the values but not fully accept it as their own. There-
fore, it is plausible that such partial internalisation leads
to introjected regulation displaying some of the benefits
of identified regulation, as well as some of the negative
© 2014 International Union of Psychological Science

consequences of external regulation. Practitioners should
hence be cautious when triggering introjected regulation.
Even though it has positive relations with satisfaction
or pleasant emotion, the cost (the positive relations
with negative outcomes, e.g., ill symptoms, unpleasant
emotion) should also be taken into consideration.
In this sense, many SDT studies using controlled and
autonomous classification of motivation have overlooked
the special functioning of different types of motivation,
especially introjected regulation. The research on psy-
chological functioning of introjected regulation is still
limited. Given the mixed consequences it may bring to
individuals, further studies are needed to uncover the
psychological functioning of introjected regulation.
The mediating roles of motivation
The current study found support for the hypothesis that
motivation mediates the relations between perceived
autonomy support and vocational well-being. Intrin-
sic motivation, for example, significantly mediated the
relations between perceived autonomy support and job
satisfaction as well as the relation between perceived
autonomy support and illness symptoms. These findings
highlight how the psychological climate created in organ-
isations (i.e., perceived autonomy support), is linked to
workers’ motivation, which in turn predicts their voca-
tional well-being, in addition to their engagement and
productivity. From a theoretical perspective, the findings
support SDT by showing that intrinsic motivation and
identified regulation, the two most autonomous types of
motivation, predict well-being in a vocational context,
not only in terms of quantity of motivation, but more
importantly, in terms of the quality of their influences in
driving individual behaviour.
Limitations and future directions
Some limitations of the current study need to be con-
sidered. First, the participants of the current study were
teachers in two government schools in a medium sized
city in the Hebei province of China. Given the diverse
geographical locations of the major cities within the huge
country of China, different regions and career diversities
may have differences in the modernization and globalisa-
tion processes, social economic development and open-
ness to Western cultures. Hence generalisation of the
results to other areas and other vocations in China and
elsewhere should be done with caution. Future studies
should replicate this model in other work settings.
Second, the study was cross-sectional in nature, and
thus our path models did not allow us to draw causal
conclusions. Further studies may consider using a lon-
gitudinal design to examine the dynamic changes in the
relations among perceived autonomy support, motivation
© 2014 International Union of Psychological Science
MOTIVATION AND WELL-BEING 9
and well-being. In addition, although the results of Har-
man’s one-factor test and the single-factor confirmatory
factor analysis suggest that common method variance is
not of great concern, future studies may consider minimis-
ing this potential problem through procedural remedies,
such as obtaining measures of the predictor and criterion
variable from different sources, or conducting experimen-
tal studies with manipulations of independent variables
(Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003).
Third, the current study measured a limited set of indi-
cators of well-being related to work (i.e., job satisfaction,
work stress, illness symptoms). Future research may con-
sider examining a wider range of indicators of well-being,
such as positive affect, mood.
Fourth, the current focused on psychological percep-
tions at a personal level. Thus the findings do not allow
generalisation to the organisational level. Further stud-
ies should attempt to measure organisational cultures and
climates through the use of multi-level sampling and ana-
lytical techniques.
Fifth, the current study found that introjected regula-
tion positively predicted both job satisfaction and illness
symptoms. While this finding is consistent with Ng et al.
(2012) showing that introjected regulation may have both
positive and negative impacts, we need to ask whether
such impacts are culture specific, and when and where
introjected regulation may be adaptive or maladaptive. In
essence, the underlying processes and outcomes related
to introjected regulation need to be further studied.
Sixth, the current study found that male employ-
ees, who comprised less than a third of the total sam-
ple, showed higher introjected and external regulation
compared with female employees, and thus gender was
entered as a control variable in the primary analyses.
Nonetheless, future studies might further examine gender
differences.
Seventh, although the current research findings support
the applicability of SDT within a Chinese organisa-
tional context, it is still unclear whether the model
proposed could be generalised to any other types of
contexts or whether any boundary conditions (e.g.,
individualism/collectivism, independent/interdependent
self-construal) may moderate the results. For example,
Chirkov et al. (2003) have highlighted that autonomy
is largely orthogonal to both independence and indi-
vidualism, and therefore more empirical studies are
needed to further clarify the relations between autonomy,
independence and individualism and how they may
jointly (additively or interactively) relate to motivation,
well-being and other outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Our findings have several important implications for moti-
vation in the workplace and well-being. With regard to
10 NIE ET AL.
theory, the findings support the application of SDT in the
organisational setting of a Chinese government school. In
particular, the results highlight the importance of auton-
omy support, even in the context of Chinese culture that is
often described as unsupportive of the individual’s auton-
omy in work. Furthermore, the current findings also sug-
gest that the function of introjected regulation needs to be
further considered and clarified, especially with respect to
its implications with different cultural contexts.
With regard to practical implications, the core mes-
sage from the current study is that work motivation plays
an important role in employees’ well-being, with more
autonomous forms of motivation being more beneficial.
Intrinsic motivation was especially associated with more
positive well-being (e.g., higher job satisfaction, lower
ill symptoms). In contrast, amotivation is the most mal-
adaptive motivation because it is related to higher work
stress and more illness symptoms. In addition, from our
findings, motivations variously mediated the relations
between autonomy support and well-being outcomes.
Strategies that support autonomy may be critical in foster-
ing intrinsic motivation and identified regulation, which
are forms of motivation most characterised by commit-
ment and engagement, and employee well-being.
Manuscript received February 2014
Revised manuscript accepted October 2014
REFERENCES
Baard, P. P., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Intrinsic
need satisfaction: A motivational basis of perfor-
mance and well-being in two work settings. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 34(10), 2045–2068.
doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02690.x.
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with Amos:
Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Group.
Chirkov, V., & Ryan, R. M. (2001). Parent and teacher
autonomy-support in Russian and U.S. Adolescents:
Common effects on well-being and academic motivation.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 618–635.
doi:10.1177/0022022101032005006.
Chirkov, V., Ryan, R. M., Kim, Y., & Kaplan, U. (2003).
Differentiating autonomy from individualism and indepen-
dence: A self-determination theory perspective on inter-
nalization of cultural orientations and well-being. Jour-
nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(1), 97–110.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.97.
Chua, S. N., Wong, N., & Koestner, R. (2014). Autonomy
and controlling support are two sides of the same coin.
Personality and Individual Differences, 68(0), 48–52.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.04.008.
Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., Gagné, 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: A cross-cultural study of self-determination.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(8), 930–942.
doi:10.1177/0146167201278002.
Fernet, C., Guay, F., Senécal, C., & Austin, S. (2012). Pre-
dicting intraindividual changes in teacher burnout: The
role of perceived school environment and motivational
factors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(4), 514–525.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.11.013.
Fernet, C., Senécal, C., Guay, F., Marsh, H., & Dowson,
M. (2008). The work tasks motivation scale for teachers
(WTMST). Journal of Career Assessment, 16(2), 256–279.
doi:10.1177/1069072707305764.
Gagné, M., Ryan, R. M., & Bargmann, K. (2003). Auton-
omy support and need satisfaction in the motivation and
well-being of gymnasts. Journal of Applied Sport Psychol-
ogy, 15(4), 372–390. doi:10.1080/714044203.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham,
R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Kins, E., Beyers, W., Soenens, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2009).
Patterns of home leaving and subjective well-being in
emerging adulthood: The role of motivational processes
and parental autonomy support. Developmental Psychology,
45(5), 1416–1429. doi:10.1037/a0015580.
Kitayama, S., Snibbe, A. C., Markus, H. R., & Suzuki, T.
(2004). Is there any “free” choice? Self and dissonance
in two cultures. Psychological Science, 15(8), 527–533.
doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00714.x.
Koestner, R., Losier, G. F., Vallerand, R. J., & Carducci, D.
(1996). Identified and introjected forms of political inter-
nalization: Extending self-determination theory. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 1025–1036.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.5.1025.
Liem, A. D., & Nie, Y. (2008). Values, achievement goals, and
individual-oriented and social-oriented achievement motiva-
tions among Chinese and Indonesian secondary school stu-
dents. International Journal of Psychology, 43(5), 898–903.
doi:10.1080/00207590701838097.
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S.
G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test
mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psycholog-
ical Methods, 7(1), 83. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.83.
Markus, H. R., Kitayama, S., & Heiman, R. J. (1996). Culture
and “basic” psychological principles. In E. T. Higgins & A.
W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic
principles (pp. 857–913). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Ng, J. Y., Ntoumanis, N., Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C., Deci, E.
L., Ryan, R. M., Duda, J. L., & Williams, G. C. (2012).
Self-determination theory applied to health contexts: A
meta-analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(4),
325–340. doi:10.1177/1745691612447309.
Pelletier, L. G., Fortier, M. S., Vallerand, R. J., & Brière, N. M.
(2001). Associations among perceived autonomy support,
forms of self-regulation, and persistence: A prospec-
tive study. Motivation and Emotion, 25(4), 279–306.
doi:10.1023/a:1014805132406.
Pettegrew, L. S., & Wolf, G. E. (1982). Validating measures
of teacher stress. American Educational Research Journal,
19(3), 373–396. doi:10.2307/1162720.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N.
P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research:
© 2014 International Union of Psychological Science

A critical review of the literature and recommended reme-
dies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resam-
pling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects
in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods,
40(3), 879–891. doi:10.3758/brm.40.3.879.
Richer, S. F., Blanchard, C., & Vallerand, R. J. (2002). A
motivational model of work turnover. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 32(10), 2089–2113.
Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of
causality and internalization: Examining reasons for act-
ing in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 57(5), 749–761. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.
5.749.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory
and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social develop-
ment, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
doi:10.1037//0003-066X.55.1.68.
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism:
New cultural dimensions of values. In H. C. T. U.
Kim, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.),
© 2014 International Union of Psychological Science
MOTIVATION AND WELL-BEING 11
Individualism and collectivism: Theory, methods, and
application (pp. 85–119). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Taylor, I. M., & Ntoumanis, N. (2007). Teacher motivational
strategies and student self-determination in physical educa-
tion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(4), 747–760.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.747.
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation. Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, 29, 271–360.
Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., de Witte, H., & Feather, N. T.
(2005). Understanding unemployed people’s job search
behaviour, unemployment experience and well-being:
A comparison of expectancy-value theory and self-
determination theory [Article]. British Journal of Social Psy-
chology, 44(2), 269–287. doi:10.1348/014466604x17641.
Yamauchi, H., & Tanaka, K. (1998). Relations of autonomy,
self-referenced beliefs, and self-regulated learning among
Japanese children. Psychological Reports, 82(3), 803–816.
Zhou, M., Ma, W. J., & Deci, E. L. (2009). The importance of
autonomy for rural Chinese children’s motivation for learn-
ing. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(4), 492–498.
doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2009.05.003.