Testing a bi-factor model to disentangle general and specific factors of motivation in self-determination theory ? ??

We examined the utility of the bi-factor model for disentangling general motivation and specific motivations (i.e., amotivation, external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic regulations) in relation to goal progress and physical activity (PA). Participants (N = 186 undergraduate students; Mage = 19.26 years) completed assessments of motivation and PA at Time 1. Four weeks later, PA and goal progress were assessed at Time 2. Results indicated that the exploratory bi-factor model specifying motivational regulations as the specific factors and general motivation as the general factor was a good fit to the data. Results of the structural equation model indicated that identified and intrinsic regulations and general motivation predicted concurrent PA at Time 1. A novel finding was that controlling for concurrent PA at Time 1, general motivation emerged as the only predictor of Time 2 goal progress and PA. Results highlight the importance of examining general motivation in addition to quality of motivation in tandem because general motivation emerged as the sole significant longitudinal predictor of PA outcomes. ! 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Testing a bi-factor model to disentangle general and specific factors of motivation in self-determination theory ‘To be or not to be motivated’ is a question that has attracted a large amount of theoretical and empirical attention in performance and health-related research streams (Gagné et al., 2014; Ng et al., 2012). Using self-determination theory (SDT), Deci and Ryan (2000) contend that individuals pursue activities for different reasons that reflect distinct motivations varying in quality rather than solely quantity. Across contexts, support for the assertion that motivation can be separated into specific factors of motivation that differentially predict behavior has been found (Deci & Ryan). Yet, it seems possible that an individual could have a general motivation that is characterized by the endorsement of multiple specific factors of motivation (Ryan, 1995). In other words, although items from SDT-based motivation scales can be regrouped into specific factors of motivation, the scores on the same items may also reflect a general factor of motivation characterizing the endorsement of multiple reasons for engaging in behavior. Using SDT, we contend that the quality of motivation and general motivation are reconcilable properties of human motivation that can be unpacked and studied together within the confines of bi-factor analysis. Specific factors of motivation are part of a larger pool of motivational resources (i.e., general motivation) likely to facilitate task engagement. As such, specific and general factors of motivation are expected to be empirically distinguishable and uniquely associated with consequential outcomes. Using the context of physical activity (PA) as an example, we sought to demonstrate that specific and general factors of motivation can be differentiated to predict goal progress and PA 4 weeks later. 1.1. Self-determination theory Deci and Ryan (2000) hypothesized that individuals pursue their activities for different reasons that can be portrayed using six specific factors of motivation. Questionnaires have been developed to assess the extent or the quantity of endorsement of these specific factors of motivation (Gagné et al., 2014; Mullan, Markland, & Ingledew, 1997). On theoretical grounds, these motivations or behavioral regulations are assumed to differ in quality insofar as each regulation varies based on the relative autonomy that reflects if an activity has been internalized into the self. Amotivation is characterized by non-regulation and represents a perception that the behavior will not bring about a desired outcome. Extrinsic motivation is underpinned by four specific types of regulation (external, introjected, identified, and integrated regulations). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.059 0191-8869/! 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. q This research was supported by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and by a teaching release award from the Faculty of Social Sciences awarded to Patrick Gaudreau. qq This article is a Special issue article – ‘‘Young researcher award 2014’’. ⇑ Corresponding author at: Healthy Active Living and Obesity Research Group, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. E-mail address: [email protected] (K.E. Gunnell). Personality and Individual Differences 81 (2015) 35–40