A meta-analysis of the influence of gender on self-determination theory's motivational regulations for physical activity.

Abstract

Self-determination theory (SDT) is a motivation metatheory that has received significant empirical support across several contexts of human behaviour. The motivational regulations as espoused by SDT refer to differing degrees of self-determination that individuals can demonstrate toward their behaviour. In particular, the regulations have received strong empirical support as predictors of exercise. However, literature in this domain has revealed inconsistent findings with respect to gender on levels of motivational regulations. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to examine differences between men and women on SDT’s motivational regulations for exercise using studies that employed the Behavioural Regulations in Exercise Questionnaire (E. Mullan, D. Markland, & D. K. Ingledew, 1997, A graded conceptualisation of self-determination in the regulation of exercise behaviour: Development of a measure using confirmatory factor analytic procedures. Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 23, pp. 745–752.). A total of 27 studies contributed total effect sizes (Hedge’s g) of gender differences, which were computed independently for each of the regulations, as well as for a composite self-determination score. Overall, results from random-effects models revealed near-zero effect sizes, thus representing negligible differences between men and women on each of the regulations. The findings with respect to SDT’s fundamental principles of universality across genders are carefully interpreted in light of existing research of gender invariance and with suggestions for future work.