We created a life-goal assessment drawing from self-determination theory and achievement goal literature, examining its predictive power regarding immoral behavior and subjective well-being. Our source items assessed direction and energization of motivation, via the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic aims and between intrinsic and extrinsic reasons for acting, respectively. Fused source items assessed four goal complexes representing a combination of direction and energization. Across three studies (Ns = 109, 121, and 398), the extrinsic aim/extrinsic reason complex was consistently associated with immoral and/or unethical behavior beyond four source and three other goal complex variables. This was consistent with the triangle model of responsibility’s claim that immoral behaviors may result when individuals disengage the self from moral prescriptions. The extrinsic/extrinsic complex also predicted lower subjective well-being, albeit less consistently. Our goal complex approach sheds light on how self-determination theory’s goal contents and organismic integration mini-theories interact, particularly with respect to unethical behavior.
AshtonM. C.LeeK. (2007). Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 150-166.
2.
AssorA. (2012). Allowing choice and nurturing an inner compass: Educational practices supporting students’ need for autonomy. In ChristensonS.ReschlyA.WylieC. (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 421-439). New York, NY: Springer.
3.
BanduraA. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 193-209.
4.
BrittT. W. (1999). Engaging the self in the field: Testing the triangle model of responsibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 698-708.
5.
BusseriM. A. (2015). Toward a resolution of the tripartite structure of subjective well-being. Journal of Personality, 83, 413-428.
6.
CarverC. S.BairdE. (1998). The American dream revisited: Is it what you want or why you want it that matters?Psychological Science, 9, 289-292.
7.
ChenY. J.TangT. L. P. (2006). Attitude toward and propensity to engage in unethical behavior: Measurement invariance across major among university students. Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 77-93.
8.
ChowdhuryR. M.FernandoM. (2013). The role of spiritual well-being and materialism in determining consumers’ ethical beliefs: An empirical study with Australian consumers. Journal of Business Ethics, 113, 61-79.
9.
DamonW.ColbyA. (2015). The power of ideals: The real story of moral choice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
10.
DeciE. L.RyanR. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum.
11.
DeciE. L.RyanR. M. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
12.
DeckopJ. R.GiacaloneR. A.JurkiewiczC. L. (2015). Materialism and workplace behaviors: Does wanting more result in less?Social Indicators Research, 121, 787-803.
13.
DienerE. D.EmmonsR. A.LarsenR. J.GriffinS. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.
14.
ElliotA. J.MurayamaK. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 613-628.
15.
ElliotA. J.ThrashT. M. (2001). Achievement goals and the hierarchical model of achievement motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 139-156.
16.
EmmonsR. A. (1991). Personal strivings, daily life events, and psychological and physical well-being. Journal of Personality, 59, 453-472.
17.
FoulkesL.Seara-CardosoA.NeumannC. S.RogersJ. S.VidingE. (2014). Looking after number one: Associations between psychopathic traits and measures of social motivation and functioning in a community sample of males. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 36, 22-29.
18.
FrimerJ. A.WalkerL. J. (2009). Reconciling the self and morality: An empirical model of moral centrality development. Developmental Psychology, 45, 1669-1681.
19.
FrimerJ. A.WalkerL. J.DunlopW. L.LeeB. H.RichesA. (2011). The integration of agency and communion in moral personality: Evidence of enlightened self-interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 149-163.
20.
FrimerJ. A.WalkerL. J.LeeB. H.RichesA.DunlopW. L. (2012). Hierarchical integration of agency and communion: A study of influential moral figures. Journal of Personality, 80, 1117-1145.
21.
GardnerW.MulveyE. P.ShawE. C. (1995). Regression analyses of counts and rates: Poisson, overdispersed Poisson, and negative binomial models. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 392-404.
22.
GaudreauP. (2012). Goal self-concordance moderates the relationship between achievement goals and indicators of academic adjustment. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 827-832.
23.
GilletN.LafrenièreM. A. K.VallerandR. J.HuartI.FouquereauE. (2014). The effects of autonomous and controlled regulation of performance-approach goals on well-being: A process model. British Journal of Social Psychology, 53, 154-174.
24.
GinoF.KouchakiM.GalinskyA. D. (2015). The moral virtue of authenticity: How inauthenticity produces feelings of immorality and impurity. Psychological Science, 26, 983-996.
25.
HaidtJ. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York, NY: Pantheon.
26.
HodgeK.GucciardiD. F. (2015). Antisocial and prosocial behavior in sport: The role of motivational climate, basic psychological needs, and moral disengagement. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 37, 257-273.
27.
HodgeK.HargreavesE. A.GerrardD.LonsdaleC. (2013). Psychological mechanisms underlying doping attitudes in sport: Motivation and moral disengagement. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 35, 419-432.
28.
KaplanU. (2016). Moral motivation as a dynamic developmental process: Toward an integrative synthesis. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 47, 195-221.
29.
KasserT. (2002). Sketches for a self-determination theory of values. In DeciE.RyanR. (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 123-140). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
30.
KasserT. (2016). Materialistic values and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 489-514.
31.
KasserT.RyanR. M. (1993). A dark side of the American dream: Correlates of financial success as a central life aspiration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 410-422.
32.
KohlbergL. (2008). The development of children’s orientations toward a moral order: I. Sequence in the development of moral thought. Human Development, 51, 8-20.
33.
KolodinskyR. W.MaddenT. M.ZiskD. S.HenkelE. T. (2010). Attitudes about corporate social responsibility: Business student predictors. Journal of Business Ethics, 91, 167-181.
34.
LevayK. E.FreeseJ.DruckmanJ. N. (2016). The demographic and political composition of Mechanical Turk samples. SAGE Open, 6(1), 1-17.
35.
McHoskeyJ. W. (1999). Machiavellianism, intrinsic versus extrinsic goals, and social interest: A self-determination theory analysis. Motivation and Emotion, 23, 267-283.
36.
MichouA.VansteenkisteM.MouratidisA.LensW. (2014). Enriching the hierarchical model of achievement motivation: Autonomous and controlling reasons underlying achievement goals. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 650-666.
37.
MurdockT. B.AndermanE. M. (2006). Motivational perspectives on student cheating: Toward an integrated model of academic dishonesty. Educational Psychologist, 41, 129-145.
38.
NtoumanisN.StandageM. (2009). Morality in sport: A self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 21, 365-380.
39.
PulfreyC.ButeraF. (2013). Why neoliberal values of self-enhancement lead to cheating in higher education: A motivational account. Psychological Science, 24, 2153-2162.
40.
RemmelR. J.GlennA. L. (2015). Immorality in the adult brain. In DecetyJ.WheatlyT. (Eds.), The moral brain: A multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 239-251). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41.
SchlenkerB. R.BrittT. W.PenningtonJ.MurphyR.DohertyK. (1994). The triangle model of responsibility. Psychological Review, 101, 632-652.
42.
SenkoC.TropianoK. L. (2016). Comparing three models of achievement goals: Goal orientations, goal standards, and goal complexes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108, 1178-1192.
43.
SheldonK. M.GordeevaT.LeontievD.LynchM. F.OsinE.RasskazovaE.DementiyL. (2018). Freedom and responsibility go together: Personality, experimental, and cultural demonstrations. Journal of Research in Personality, 73, 63-74.
44.
SheldonK. M.KasserT. (1995). Coherence and congruence: Two aspects of personality integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 531-543.
45.
SheldonK. M.KasserT. (2008). Psychological threat and extrinsic goal striving. Motivation and Emotion, 32, 37-45.
46.
SheldonK. M.KriegerL. S. (2014). Walking the talk: Value importance, value enactment, and well-being. Motivation and Emotion, 38, 609-619.
47.
SheldonK. M.McGregorH. A. (2000). Extrinsic value orientation and “the tragedy of the commons.”Journal of Personality, 68, 383-411.
48.
SheldonK. M.OsinE. V.GordeevaT. O.SuchkovD. D.SychevO. A. (2017). Evaluating the dimensionality of self-determination theory’s relative autonomy continuum. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 1215-1238.
49.
SheldonK. M.RyanR. M.DeciE. L.KasserT. (2004). The independent effects of goal contents and motives on well-being: It’s both what you pursue and why you pursue it. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 475-486.
50.
ShuL. L.GinoF.BazermanM. H. (2011). Dishonest deed, clear conscience: When cheating leads to moral disengagement and motivated forgetting. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 330-349.
51.
SommetN.ElliotA. J. (2017). Achievement goals, reasons for goal pursuit, and achievement goal complexes as predictors of beneficial outcomes: Is the influence of goals reducible to reasons?Journal of Educational Psychology, 109, 1141-1162.
52.
SommetN.ElliotA. J.SheldonK. M. (in press). Achievement goal complexes: Integrating the “what” and the “why” of achievement motivation. In RobinsR.JohnO. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (4th ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
53.
SrivastavaA.LockeE. A.BartolK. M. (2001). Money and subjective well-being: It’s not the money, it’s the motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 959-971.
54.
ThrashT. M.ElliotA. J. (2001). Delimiting and integrating achievement motive and goal constructs. In EfklidesA.KuhlJ.SorrentinoR. M. (Eds.), Trends and prospects in motivation research (pp. 3-21). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
55.
VansteenkisteM.LensW.ElliotA. J.SoenensB.MouratidisA. (2014). Moving the achievement goal approach one step forward: Toward a systematic examination of the autonomous and controlled reasons underlying achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 49, 153-174.
56.
VansteenkisteM.MouratidisA.LensW. (2010). Detaching reasons from aims: Fair play and well-being in soccer as a function of pursuing performance-approach goals for autonomous or controlling reasons. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 32, 217-242.
57.
VansteenkisteM.MouratidisA.Van RietT.LensW. (2014). Examining correlates of game-to-game variation in volleyball players’ achievement goal pursuit and underlying autonomous and controlling reasons. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 36, 131-145.
58.
VansteenkisteM.NiemiecC. P.SoenensB. (2010). The development of the five mini-theories of self-determination theory: An historical overview, emerging trends, and future directions. In UrdanT. C.KarabenickS. A. (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement, v. 16A—The decade ahead: Theoretical perspectives on motivation and achievement (pp. 105-165). London, England: Emerald Group Publishing.
59.
VansteenkisteM.SmeetsS.SoenensB.LensW.MatosL.DeciE. L. (2010). Autonomous and controlled regulation of performance-approach goals: Their relations to perfectionism and educational outcomes. Motivation and Emotion, 34, 333-353.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
