Introduction

Self-determination theory (SDT) is a comprehensive macro theory within psychology that examines human motivation and personality and emphasises individuals' inherent tendencies toward personal development and psychological fulfilment (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Deci & Ryan, 2016:p9). The earliest work on SDT began in 1971, when Edward L. Deci demonstrated that providing individuals with monetary incentives for engaging in activities they inherently find enjoyable may diminish their intrinsic motivation to perform those tasks (Deci, 1971). It was much later, in 1985, that SDT was formally articulated into a coherent theory exploring the extent to which behaviours are self-initiated and autonomously regulated, independent of external pressures or incentives, by Edward L. Deci and Richard Ryan in their book “Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behaviour”. Thus, it primarily investigates the conditions that foster self-motivation and self-determination (Deci, 2013). Building upon the initial research on SDT (i.e., Deci, 1971; 10.1007/978-1-4613-4446-9_4; Deci & Ryan, 1980), Deci and Ryan further refined their theoretical framework by distinguishing between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and identifying three core psychological needs fundamental to self-determination. These needs, which are considered inherent and universally applicable, serve as critical drivers of self-initiated behaviour and contribute to overall psychological well-being (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Laursen & Zukauskiene, 2017:p57). Specifically, they include autonomy, which refers to the ability to regulate one’s actions in a self-directed manner; competence, which involves the perception of effectiveness and mastery in one’s interactions with the environment; and relatedness, which pertains to the need for meaningful social connections and a sense of belonging (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Deci et al., 1991; Laursen & Zukauskiene, 2017:p57). The fulfilment of these basic psychological needs can facilitate deeper learning, foster the development of personality and identity, and support the long-term maintenance of behavioural change (Li et al., 2022). Moreover, the theory posits that while understanding the level of motivation can help predict the frequency or extent of certain behaviours, it is the nature or type of motivation that provides insight into the quality and long-term persistence of those behaviours (Wright, 2015:p486). SDT presently comprises six interrelated mini theories (Vansteenkiste, Ryan & Soenens, 2020): Cognitive evaluation theory (Deci & Ryan, 1980); Organismic integration theory (Deci & Ryan, 1990); Causality orientations theory (Deci, 2013); Goal contents theory (Kasser & Ryan, 2001:p116); Basic psychological needs theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000); and Relationship motivation theory (La Guardia et al., 2000), each encompassing a structured set of propositions that generate a broader network of hypotheses. These propositions have been formulated inductively, grounded on converging empirical findings, to avoid premature theoretical assertions (Ryan & Deci, 2019). The development of these mini-theories (Deci & Ryan, 2000)  occurred progressively, with each emerging in response to an expanding body of empirical evidence. As SDT expanded across different domains like education, health, work, sports and psychotherapy, researchers required more focused models that explain how different processes influence motivation, development and well-being. Thus, these mini theories are rather refinements that address various motivational dynamics (e.g., external rewards, goal setting, personality traits) under the larger SDT umbrella. Particularly, the first mini theory, cognitive evaluation theory (Deci & Ryan, 1980), explains how external forces like rewards, feedback and timelines affect intrinsic motivation by influencing perceptions of autonomy and competence. The second mini theory, Organismic integration theory (Deci & Ryan, 1990), explores how different types of extrinsic motivation can be internalized, forming a continuum from external control to complete self-determination. The third mini theory, Causality orientations theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), discusses individual differences in motivational tendencies based on how people orient themselves towards their environments: autonomous, controlled or impersonal orientations. The fourth mini theory, Goal contents theory (Kasser & Ryan, 2001:p116), distinguishes intrinsic goals from extrinsic goals and examines how these relate to motivation and well-being. The fifth mini theory, Basic psychological needs theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), identifies three universal psychological needs, autonomy, competence and relatedness, that have to be satisfied for psychological growth, integrity and well-being. The last mini theory, Relationship motivation theory (La Guardia et al., 2000), explains how and why interpersonal relationships can support or thwart basic psychological needs and thus impact motivation and well-being.

Overall, the SDT paves the way not only towards the foundational understanding of motivation and human development but also holds practical significance across various applied domains, including parenting, education, organisational behaviour, sports, healthcare, and technology (Ryan & Deci, 2019). Across these contexts, SDT emphasises the point that when individuals engage in activities with a sense of autonomy, personal endorsement, and self-agency, they tend to demonstrate enhanced performance quality, increased persistence, and greater psychological well-being compared to those driven by more externally controlled motivations.

Theory

SDT is a comprehensive framework for understanding motivation in relation to personality development, social interactions, and psychological functioning. It explores how social environments and individual differences contribute to varying forms of motivation, particularly autonomous motivation (self-driven behaviour) and controlled motivation (behaviour influenced by external pressures) (Deci, 2013; Deci & Ryan, 2002). These motivational forms subsequently impact learning, performance, subjective experience, and psychological well-being. A defining characteristic of self-determination in psychology is the ability to adaptively regulate the dynamic interaction between oneself and the external environment. When individuals are self-determined, their actions stem from personal volition, rather than external pressure or obligation. Their decisions are informed by an awareness of their intrinsic psychological needs and an adaptive perception of external circumstances. These intrinsic psychological needs, which also determine intrinsic motivation, emphasise the multifaceted nature of human motivation and the various conditions that either facilitate or impede autonomous participation in activities (Deci, 1971; Deci, 2013). Intrinsic motivation refers to an inherent and natural inclination to explore personal interests, develop one's abilities, and pursue optimal challenges. It is characterised by engaging in an activity for its inherent enjoyment and personal fulfilment, rather than as a means to achieve an external objective, distinguishing it from extrinsic motivation.  This form of motivation arises autonomously from internal psychological processes and can sustain behaviour independently of external rewards or external regulation. It plays a crucial role in fostering learning, adaptation, and the development of the competencies essential to human growth. Research suggests that intrinsic motivation is an innate characteristic, with individuals naturally exhibiting it when environmental conditions are supportive (Deci, 2013). Extrinsic motivation describes behaviours driven by factors external to the activity itself, rather than by inherent interest. Such behaviours can vary in the degree to which they are perceived as autonomous or pressured, with some actions feeling externally compelled while others align more closely with personal values and preferences. When extrinsically motivated behaviours are guided by individual values and desires rather than external controls, they exhibit a greater degree of self-determination (Deci, 2013).  Although self-determination is often associated with actively exercising control over one’s actions and environment, it also encompasses the capacity to intentionally relinquish control when such a decision is aligned with personal values or contextual demands. This voluntary choice reflects an autonomous form of regulation, whereby the individual consciously opts to defer, delegate, or accept outcomes without coercion, demonstrating flexibility in the pursuit of self-endorsed goals. (Deci, 2013; Ryan, 1995).

The theory posits that all individuals possess three fundamental psychological needs, competence, autonomy, and relatedness, which serve as essential psychological "nutrients" for optimal functioning and well-being.

• Autonomy: At the core of SDT is the principle of autonomy, which highlights the importance of volitional engagement and self-endorsement in behaviour. According to Deci and Ryan (2000), motivation is most effective when individuals experience a genuine sense of choice and control over their actions. This perception of autonomy fosters higher-quality motivation and contributes significantly to overall psychological well-being.


• Competence: The need for competence reflects an innate psychological need to develop skills, overcome challenges, and experience a sense of effectiveness. Studies indicate that when individuals feel competent, they gain a sense of achievement and psychological growth, which in turn strengthens intrinsic motivation (Deci et al., 1991).


• Relatedness: This represents the fundamental human need to establish meaningful social connections and interpersonal bonds. Within the framework of SDT, fostering a sense of belonging and social inclusion is essential for enhancing intrinsic motivation and promoting psychological well-being (Laursen & Zukauskiene, 2017:p57).

According to SDT, individuals are naturally inclined to realise their full potential when their core psychological needs are fulfilled.  Thus, individuals demonstrate an inherent propensity for personal development, which in turn fosters sustained intrinsic motivation, vitality, and overall psychological well-being. In such a state of autonomy, individuals are more likely to internalise external influences, including societal norms and objectives, particularly when these are congruent with their personal values (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Deci et al., 1991; Laursen & Zukauskiene, 2017:p57). This internalisation makes it possible for individuals to perceive their actions as self-directed, rather than externally imposed (Sheldon, 2014). However, under external pressures, internalisation may be incomplete or entirely absent, leading to different forms of regulation. Within SDT, internalisation and integration are related but different processes in the development of self-regulation Internalisation refers to the process by which individuals actively integrate externally regulated behaviours and values into their own sense of self, ultimately transforming them into personally meaningful and self-endorsed regulations (Ryan, 1995). When internalisation is hindered, individuals may experience conflict and pressure, resulting in reduced intrinsic motivation and increased negative emotions. While short-term resilience can mitigate these effects, prolonged external regulation can lead to enduring declines in well-being. Under such conditions, individuals may transition to a controlled mode of self-regulation, wherein their behaviours become detached from their core psychological needs. Over time, this may give rise to compensatory behaviours such as psychological withdrawal, emotional detachment, or narcissistic tendencies, which serve as protective responses to unmet needs. These cumulative experiences shape an individual’s causality orientation, which refers to their habitual tendency to regulate behaviour in an autonomous or controlled manner (Deci, 2013).  Integration, by contrast, represents the fullest and most complete form of internalisation, where the adopted regulations are not only accepted but also brought into harmony with one’s core values, beliefs, and sense of self (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2019). Thus, while internalisation describes the general process of taking in external motivations, integration marks the endpoint of this process, where regulations are fully assimilated into the self and enacted with a sense of volition and autonomy.

SDT outlines four levels of internalisation:

External regulation: Within the spectrum of extrinsic motivation, external regulation represents the least autonomous form. This type of motivation is characterised by behaviour that is primarily governed by external contingencies, including tangible rewards, punishments, or social expectations, rather than by an individual’s intrinsic volition (Ryan & Deci, 2000). In this form of regulation, individuals engage in an activity not because they find it inherently enjoyable or meaningful, but because they are seeking to gain a reward or avoid a negative consequence (Deci, 2013).

Introjected regulation: represents a form of extrinsic motivation in which behaviour is governed by internal pressures, such as feelings of guilt, shame, or the pursuit of self-worth (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Deci & Ryan, 2000). Unlike external regulation, which is driven by external rewards or punishments, introjected regulation involves a partial internalisation of external influences. However, it remains controlled by self-imposed pressures rather than being fully aligned with an individual’s personal values (Assor, Vansteenkiste & Kaplan, 2009).

Identified regulation is a form of extrinsic motivation in SDT where an individual recognises and accepts the personal value of a behaviour, even if they do not inherently enjoy it (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Unlike introjected regulation, which is driven by guilt or external pressure, identified regulation reflects a more autonomous and conscious choice to engage in an activity because it aligns with personal goals or values (Vansteenkiste, Ryan & Soenens, 2020).

Integrated regulation is the most autonomous form of extrinsic motivation in SDT. It occurs when an individual fully internalises a behaviour's value, aligning it with their core beliefs, identity, and personal goals (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Although the activity itself is not inherently enjoyable (not intrinsically motivated), the person engages in it because it is deeply meaningful and consistent with their sense of self (Ryan & Deci, 2019).

Adding to this, a fundamental aspect of SDT is the distinction between two forms of motivation: autonomous motivation and controlled motivation. While traditional motivation theories have predominantly conceptualised motivation as a singular construct, emphasising the overall level of motivation individuals possess to predict the intensity of their behavioural engagement, SDT diverges from this perspective. Instead, SDT prioritises the qualitative differences in motivation types as a central factor in understanding human behaviour. The theory asserts that while assessing the total amount of motivation may provide insight into the extent of behavioural engagement, examining the specific nature of the motivation is essential for predicting both the quality and sustainability of those behaviours over time.

Autonomous motivation is characterised by individuals engaging in activities with a genuine sense of volition and willingness, fully endorsing their actions either because they find them inherently enjoyable or because they align with their deeply held and integrated values (Ryan & Deci, 2000). This form of motivation is typically associated with positive affect, a greater sense of flexibility, and the perception of choice (Deci & Ryan, 2008). In contrast, controlled motivation emerges when individuals feel obligated to act due to external pressures, coercion, or a sense of duty (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Under such circumstances, individuals experience a sense of constraint and compulsion rather than an authentic sense of personal alignment and volition. The satisfaction of these psychological needs is considered fundamental for fostering intrinsic motivation, supporting integrative psychological functioning, and promoting overall well-being. In contrast, environments that frustrate these needs can hinder psychological growth and lead to maladaptive functioning.

Theory Extensions

Over time, the foundational principles of SDT have been further elaborated through the development of six distinct mini theories, each addressing specific aspects of human motivation and psychological processes (Deci, 2013).

Initially developed to address debates regarding the influence of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation, Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET) by Deci & Ryan (Deci & Ryan, 1980) emerged before the formal inception of SDT in 1985. CET explores the interaction between intrinsic motivation and external rewards. It posits that when external rewards exert controlling pressure, they undermine intrinsic motivation. Conversely, when external incentives serve an informational function by providing feedback, they enhance intrinsic motivation. More specifically, CET examines how intrinsic motivation fluctuates in response to environmental factors (such as rewards), social settings (like classroom climates), and individual influences (such as self-set goals). Its central premise is that the psychological significance of these factors can be categorised as informational, controlling, or amotivating. The extent to which each aspect is emphasised determines the impact of these factors on an individual's intrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2018). This foundational insight has significantly contributed to research on interpersonal motivational styles and the dual-process model.

Organismic Integration Theory (OIT) explores the different forms of extrinsic motivation and their role in the process of socialisation, along with the processes of internalisation and integration (Deci & Ryan, 1990). This theoretical framework posits that individuals may participate in activities they do not inherently find enjoyable due to external influences. OIT classifies extrinsic motivation into four distinct types, namely external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation, and integrated regulation, each reflecting a progressively greater degree of internalisation. These forms of extrinsic motivation are conceptualised along a continuum of relative autonomy or self-determination (Deci, 2013). At one end of this continuum lies intrinsic motivation, representing fully self-determined behaviour, whereas at the opposite extreme is amotivation, which is characterised by a complete absence of motivation to engage in an activity. Extrinsic motivation is situated between these two poles, varying in its degree of internalisation. The greater the internalisation of extrinsic motivation, the more autonomously regulated and self-determined an individual’s behaviour becomes (Wasserkampf & Kleinert, 2016).

Causality Orientations Theory (COT) investigates individual differences in motivational tendencies based on personality. It identifies three orientations toward decision-making: an autonomy orientation, a control orientation and an impersonal orientation. Particularly, autonomy orientation refers to the extent to which individuals perceive themselves as having agency and choice in their actions, responses, and opportunities within their environment. Those who exhibit a strong autonomy orientation are more likely to demonstrate high levels of intrinsic motivation, as well as identified and integrated forms of extrinsic motivation, reflecting a greater degree of self-regulation and internalisation in their behaviour. Controlled orientation refers to the extent to which individuals are aware of and influenced by external contingencies, social expectations, and external pressures. Those with a strong controlled orientation typically exhibit lower levels of intrinsic motivation and are more likely to regulate their behaviour through external and introjected forms of extrinsic motivation, which are driven by external rewards, punishments, or internalised pressures such as guilt or obligation. Impersonal orientation reflects the extent to which individuals focus on obstacles, barriers, and perceptions of their own incompetence. Those with a strong impersonal orientation often exhibit passivity and a sense of helplessness, making them more susceptible to feeling overwhelmed by external circumstances or their own internal drives and emotions (Deci & Ryan, 1985).

Basic Psychological Needs Theory (BPNT) posits that three fundamental psychological needs are essential for fostering intrinsic motivation: optimal functioning, engagement, and overall well-being. These core needs include autonomy, competence, and relatedness, as discussed previously. The satisfaction of these psychological needs is crucial for intrinsic motivation and optimal psychological functioning, promoting greater well-being, engagement, and personal growth. Conversely, when these needs are thwarted, individuals may experience diminished motivation, frustration, and psychological distress. The universal significance of autonomy, competence, and relatedness extends across various life domains, including education, the workplace, interpersonal relationships, and overall health, underscoring their broad applicability (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

Goal Contents Theory (GCT), the fifth mini theory within SDT examines the relationship between individuals' life aspirations and their overall well-being. This relationship is influenced by the extent to which basic psychological needs are either satisfied or thwarted. Intrinsic aspirations, such as personal growth, meaningful social relationships, community contribution, and physical health, inherently support the fulfilment of these psychological needs, thereby enhancing well-being. In contrast, extrinsic aspirations, including the pursuit of wealth, fame, and physical appearance, do not inherently contribute to need satisfaction and, in some cases, may even lead to need frustration, ultimately compromising psychological well-being. GCT highlights the importance of what people strive for in shaping their motivation, psychological health, and overall happiness. By prioritising intrinsic aspirations, individuals can experience greater fulfilment, sustained motivation, and enhanced well-being, whereas an overemphasis on extrinsic aspirations can lead to dissatisfaction and psychological distress (Kasser & Ryan, 1993; Kasser & Ryan, 1996).

Relationship Motivation Theory (RMT) highlights the significance of interpersonal relationships in motivation. It assumes that high-quality relationships contribute to the satisfaction of all three basic psychological needs identified in BNT, with relatedness being the most directly impacted. However, supportive relationships also foster autonomy and competence by providing a sense of security and encouragement. Particularly, it implies that the need for social connection is an inherent psychological requirement that holds intrinsic value. Establishing meaningful relationships and expressing care for others directly contribute to psychological well-being. The fulfilment of relatedness is influenced by both the social environment and individuals’ perceptions of others’ intentions. Individuals are particularly attuned to whether the care and support they receive are genuine and freely given, rather than motivated by self-interest. Similarly, providing care is more fulfilling when it arises from autonomous motivation, rather than being driven by external incentives or obligations (La Guardia et al., 2000).

Numerous experimental and correlational studies have provided empirical support for key hypotheses within Self-Determination Theory’s (SDT) mini theories. Furthermore, hypotheses derived from SDT have been effectively tested and applied across various fields, demonstrating both theoretical validity and practical relevance. A significant aspect of SDT’s contributions lies in its applicability across diverse domains. While early research primarily focused on educational and workplace settings (Deci, 2013), subsequent studies and intervention research have expanded to areas such as healthcare, parenting, sports, and physical activity, further reinforcing the theory’s broad practical significance.

Applications

For several decades, SDT has served as a foundational framework for research across multiple academic domains. By integrating the principles of SDT across diverse contexts, it is possible to create environments that support autonomy, competence, and relatedness, thereby enhancing intrinsic motivation and facilitating optimal human development. SDT remains highly relevant across multiple disciplines, providing valuable insights into the promotion of intrinsic motivation and psychological well-being in modern society. Originally formulated within the psychology discipline (Deci, 1971), the SDT has been applied to other fields such as Management e.g., (Liu, Peng & Wen, 2023; Bilal et al., 2021), organisational behaviour e.g., (Zampetakis & Arvanitis, 2024), marketing e.g., (Sáez-Ortuño et al., 2023; Soren & Chakraborty, 2024), and information systems e.g., (Peng, Crouse & Lin, 2022; Looyestyn et al., 2017; Chatterjee, 2019).  

Management research has reinforced the applicability of Self-Determination Theory as a guiding framework for enhancing employee autonomous motivation, proactive behaviour, and overall well-being by creating work environments that satisfy the needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. For example, Liu et al. (2023) found that self-leadership employees’ ability to regulate and guide their own actions positively influences job crafting through elevated autonomous motivation, while leader empowering behaviour amplifies this effect by granting employees greater choice, responsibility, and opportunities to leverage their strengths. This aligns closely with SDT’s proposition that autonomy-supportive contexts facilitate the internalisation of work goals, resulting in higher-quality motivation. Similarly, Wang et al. (2021) showed that authentic leadership enhances employees’ self-actualisation at work, with the mechanism operating through the satisfaction of basic psychological needs and the cultivation of authentic followership; these findings underscore SDT’s emphasis on the role of relatedness and competence in enabling employees to pursue personally meaningful goals. Extending this perspective, Wang et al. (2021) demonstrated that entrepreneurial leadership within SMEs boosts proactive work behaviours by granting autonomy in exploring opportunities, fostering competence through skill development, and building supportive relationships, thereby fulfilling all three SDT needs and sustaining intrinsically driven action. Collectively, these studies show that when management practices intentionally nurture autonomy, competence, and relatedness, they not only stimulate proactive engagement and creativity but also cultivate enduring motivation that drives long-term organisational success.

In the organisational behaviour domain, Self-Determination Theory mechanisms operate in contemporary workplaces, emphasising the point that fulfilling employees’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness fosters sustained motivation, innovation, and adaptive behaviours. For instance, Li et al. (2021) demonstrated that autonomous motivation was positively associated with job performance and innovative work behaviour among Chinese professionals, yet these effects diminished under high financial stress, highlighting SDT’s proposition that social-contextual factors can either support or thwart need satisfaction and, in turn, influence motivation quality. Similarly, Slemp et al.’s (Slemp et al., 2018) meta-analysis confirmed that leader autonomy support through behaviours such as offering choice, providing meaningful rationales, and acknowledging employee perspectives was consistently linked with enhanced job satisfaction, work engagement, proactive behaviours, and overall performance, echoing SDT’s assertion that autonomy-supportive environments facilitate the internalisation of organisational goals. In the learning context, Van der Kaap-Deeder et al. (2025) found that leaders who actively supported autonomy, competence, and relatedness in self-directed learning (SDL) contexts significantly bolstered employees’ autonomous learning motivation, aligning with SDT’s view that competence support and meaningful connections reinforce intrinsic engagement in skill development. Extending this, Chen et al. (2024) reported that employees were more likely to engage in voluntary, change-oriented citizenship behavior when motivated by authentic pride and need satisfaction, particularly when they evaluate progress against their own past performance rather than others. This reinforces SDT’s principle that self-endorsed motivation leads to more proactive and prosocial workplace contributions. Collectively, these findings illustrate the point that SDT offers a robust explanatory framework for understanding how leadership behaviours and contextual factors shape the quality of employee motivation, influencing not only performance but also creativity, adaptability, and organisational citizenship.

In the marketing domain, SDT offers a nuanced understanding of consumer motivation, emphasising how satisfying psychological needs for autonomy (self-direction), competence (effectiveness), and relatedness (social connection) shapes sustainable, meaningful engagement with brands and platforms. In marketing contexts, this means that customers respond best when interactions feel self-directed rather than imposed. For example, Dholakia (2006) found that consumers who initiate relationships with companies on their own terms—rather than being targeted with unsolicited promotions—tend to develop deeper loyalty and engage more meaningfully with marketing programs. In the digital space, research on anti-food-waste apps like Too Good To Go shows that both intrinsic motives (such as environmental concern) and well-aligned extrinsic incentives (such as discounts) work together to shape positive consumer attitudes and adoption behaviours (Sáez-Ortuño et al., 2023). Similarly, in immersive retail settings, a 2024 study on augmented reality (AR) shopping revealed that different customer modes of engagement—whether seeking information, social connection, immersive experiences, or inspiration—map onto distinct motivational patterns, which can be better understood through SDT’s framework (Soren & Chakraborty, 2024). Beyond sales and engagement, SDT is also crucial in sustainability marketing. For instance, research on household energy-saving behaviour demonstrates that campaigns emphasising intrinsic goals like environmental stewardship, rather than relying solely on monetary rewards, foster more enduring behavioural change (Osbaldiston & Sheldon, 2003; Tomich et al., 2011).

In the rapidly evolving digital era, understanding why users adopt, engage with, and sustain their use of technology is a central challenge in the information systems (IS) domain.SDT offers a powerful and comprehensive framework for addressing this challenge by explaining not just whether people are motivated to use technology, but how and why different types of motivation lead to varying outcomes in engagement, performance, and well-being. For instance, within the IS domain, In mHealth applications, gamification strategies such as adaptive goal setting, real-time feedback, and social challenges have been shown to satisfy competence and relatedness needs, leading to higher user retention and long-term engagement (Peng, Crouse & Lin, 2022; Looyestyn et al., 2017). In enterprise systems, autonomy-supportive features like customisable workflows and user-controlled task sequencing have been found to enhance intrinsic motivation, which correlates with improved system utilisation and employee productivity (Wu & Chen, 2017; Lee et al., 2004). Similarly, online learning platforms that provide learner choice, optimally challenging tasks, and peer collaboration environments fulfil all three needs, increasing persistence and deep learning outcomes (Chen & Jang, 2010; Hartnett, St. George & Dron, 2011). SDT has also been applied in social media and online communities, where platforms that foster authentic social interaction and reciprocity support relatedness and autonomy, enhancing voluntary knowledge sharing and sustained participation (Delgado-Márquez, Hurtado-Torres & Aragón-Correa, 2012; Chatterjee, 2019). In e-commerce, need-supportive recommendation systems that allow users to control search parameters, provide clear competence-building information, and enable community engagement improve satisfaction and purchase intentions (Shin et al., 2016). Furthermore, in cybersecurity behaviour research, SDT predicts that autonomy-supportive training environments where employees understand the rationale behind security policies and feel competent in implementing them lead to more consistent and self-endorsed compliance behaviours (Ifinedo, 2012). Across these contexts, SDT’s integration into IS research underscores its value as a guiding framework for designing digital technologies that not only capture user attention but also foster sustainable, meaningful, and self-determined engagement over time.

Limitations

While Self-Determination Theory is influential in motivation research, it has several notable limitations. First, its emphasis on autonomy reflects a Western individualistic bias, raising questions about its applicability in collectivist cultures where interdependence is prioritised (Chirkov et al., 2003; DeVoe & Iyengar, 2004). The assumption that autonomy, competence, and relatedness are universally valued has been contested, with evidence suggesting cultural variation in need prioritisation (Church et al., 2013). Methodologically, SDT faces challenges in operationalising its motivational continuum, as differentiating between intrinsic, identified, introjected, and external regulation can be problematic, and self-report instruments such as the Basic Psychological Needs Scale are vulnerable to social desirability bias (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Sheldon & Hilpert, 2012). Some constructs, like the Relative Autonomy Index, have been criticised for weak psychometric validity (Chemolli & Gagné, 2014). The theory also risks oversimplifying motivation by emphasising intrinsic over extrinsic factors, potentially underestimating the constructive role of well-structured extrinsic motivators in low-interest tasks (Cerasoli, Nicklin & Ford, 2014). Moreover, granting excessive autonomy can lead to decision fatigue and reduced performance, challenging the universality of the “more autonomy is better” principle (Iyengar & Lepper, 2000). SDT is relatively under-integrated with broader psychological frameworks such as the Big Five or social identity theory, limiting interdisciplinary insights (Vansteenkiste, Ryan & Soenens, 2020), and much of the evidence base remains cross-sectional, with calls for longitudinal and neuroscientific studies to better capture motivational dynamics over time (Howard et al., 2021). Finally, in applied contexts such as human–computer interaction and game design, SDT principles are sometimes used superficially, neglecting the theory’s nuanced requirements for sustaining deep engagement (Ryan, Rigby & Przybylski, 2006).