Do students with different motives for physical education respond differently to autonomy-supportive and controlling teaching?

128 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Fostering self-efficacy and self-regulation in higher education: a matter of autonomy support or academic motivation? (2019, background): “In the context of physical education, De Meyer et al. (2016) pointed to the incongruence between how teachers perceived which supportive behaviour would be beneficial for what students, and which needs students actually expressed.”
Toward an Integrative and Fine-Grained Insight in Motivating and Demotivating Teaching Styles: The Merits of a Circumplex Approach (2019, background): “In light of a handful studies which indicated that teacher autonomy support (Assor et al., 2002; Patall et al., 2013), teacher control (De Meyer et al., 2016) and teacher structure (Haerens et al., 2013) can be deconstructed into subareas, we expected that there would be room for differentiation…”
Perceived teachers’ behavior and students’ engagement in physical education: the mediating role of basic psychological needs and self-determined motivation (2020, methodology): “…towards their students to enforce participation (Van den Berghe et al. 2015); such need-thwarting teachers are more likely to recruit disciplinary measures and to rely on guilt-induction and criticism to students who fail to meet their expectations (De Meyer et al. 2016; Haerens et al. 2015).”