A theoretical upgrade of the concept of parental psychological control: Proposing new insights on the basis of self-determination theory

By Bart Soenens, Maarten Vansteenkiste. 2010

1,056 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/54fdacadac803ba8d6d6517dca7ba56a49166095

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

The role of teachers’ controlling behaviour in physical education on adolescents’ health-related quality of life: test of a conditional process model* (2019, background): “Still, the supervisor’s behaviour cannot be perceived simultaneously autonomy-supportive and controlling (Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010), instead he or she displays a mix of controlling and autonomous behaviours throughout a lesson.”
Brick by Brick: The Origins, Development, and Future of Self-Determination Theory (2019, background): “This unity is supported by reflectivity, and even more specifically by mindfulness, understood within SDT as non-defensive or open experiencing of what is occurring within and outside oneself (Deci, Ryan, Schultz, & Niemiec, 2015; Ryan & Rigby, 2015).”
Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions (2020, neutral): “Although structure can especially enhance competence satisfaction, its effects are influenced by how it is delivered (Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010).”
On Psychological Growth and Vulnerability: Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Need Frustration as a Unifying Principle (2013, background): “…instance, a mother may not be very attentive to her children; yet, this form of parent- ing clearly differs from parenting practices such as maltreatment (Cicchetti, 2006), use of coercive physical force (Talwar & Lee, 2011), or intrusive shaming and guilt induction (Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010).”
Beware of your teaching style: A school-year long investigation of controlling teaching and student motivational experiences (2018, background): “Such internal pressures are usually activated in more covert and subtle ways (Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010).”
Psychometric Evaluation of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (BPNSFS) in Italy (2018, background): “…evaluation; BPNSFS Self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985; Deci & Ryan, 2002) has become a popular framework for examiningmotivational issues in several contexts (e.g., Costa, Gugliandolo, Barberis, & Larcan, 2016; Ng et al., 2012; Ryan & Deci, 2013; Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010).”
Validation of the Perceived Parental Autonomy Support Scale (P-PASS) (2015, background): “In addition, although controlling have been categorized as externally and internally controlling (Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010) and as pertaining to achievement or interpersonal closeness (Soenens, Vansteenkiste, & Luyten, 2010), the present instrument was not developed with these distinctions in…”
The Mediating Role of Experiences of Need Satisfaction in Associations Between Parental Psychological Control and Internalizing Problems: A Study Among Italian College Students (2015, methodology): “The strongest correlation between psychological control and the needs was obtained with the need for autonomy, which is logical given that psychological control can indeed be considered parental behavior that most directly frustrates the need for autonomy (Soenens and Vansteenkiste 2010).”
Perceived Maternal Autonomy Support and Early Adolescent Emotion Regulation: A Longitudinal Study (2015, positive): “…style, which involves (1) structure (e.g., communicating clear and consistent guidelines for behavior), (2) involvement (e.g., creating a warm and responsive climate in the interaction with the child), and (3) autonomy support (Joussemet, Landry, & Koestner, 2008; Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010).”
Do perceived autonomy-supportive and controlling teaching relate to physical education students' motivational experiences through unique pathways? Distinguishing between the bright and dark side of motivation (2015, background): “…has shown that autonomous motivation predicts higher activity levels and greater engagement (Aelterman et al., 2012), higher concentration (Ntoumanis, 2005) andmore participation in optional physical activities (Haerens, Kirk, Cardon, De Bourdeaudhuij, & Vansteenkiste, 2010; Taylor et al., 2010).”
Does observed controlling teaching behavior relate to students’ motivation in physical education? (2014, background): “According to SDT, a controlling style can be expressed in at least two different ways, that is, externally or internally controlling (Ryan, 1982; Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010).”