Mindfulness has been shown to have varied associations with different forms of motivation, leading to a lack of clarity as to how and when it may foster healthy motivational states. Grounded in self-determination theory, the present study proposes a theoretical model for how mindfulness supports different forms of human motivation, and then tests this via meta-analysis. A systematic review identified 89 relevant studies (N = 25,176), comprising 104 independent data sets and 200 effect sizes. We used a three-level modeling approach to meta-analyze these data. Across both correlational and intervention studies, we found consistent support for mindfulness predicting more autonomous forms of motivation and, among correlational studies, less controlled motivation and amotivation. We conducted moderation analyses to probe heterogeneity in the effects, including bias within studies. We conclude by highlighting substantive and methodological issues that need to be addressed in future research in this area.

Mindfulness and motivation are both highly researched topics of great consequence for individual and social wellness. Using the lens of self-determination theory, we review evidence indicating that mindfulness is differentially related to different types of motivations, playing a facilitating role for highly autonomous forms of motivation, but not for externally controlled or introjected (self-controlling) forms of motivation. A key contribution of this review is our contention that mindfulness confers a range of intra- and interindividual benefits (e.g., well-being and prosociality) in part through its relation to autonomous motivations, a claim for which we outline preliminary evidence. Finally, we discuss how future research connecting mindfulness and motivation is important for both fields of study, for applied practices in areas such as psychotherapy and business, and for enhancing understanding of the processes underlying human wellness.

Self-determination theory holds that the intrinsic and extrinsic content of people's aspirations differentially affect their wellness. An evidence base spanning nearly 30 years indicates that focusing on intrinsic goals (such as for growth, relationships, community giving, and health) promotes well-being, whereas a focus on extrinsic goals (such as for wealth, fame, and beauty) deters well-being. Yet, the evidence base contains exceptions, and some authors have argued that focusing on extrinsic goals may not be universally detrimental. We conducted a systematic review and used multilevel meta-analytic structural equation modeling to evaluate the links between intrinsic and extrinsic aspirations with indices of well-being and ill-being. Across 92 reports (105 studies), 1,808 effects, and a total sample of N = 70,110, we found that intrinsic aspirations were linked positively with well-being, r = 0.24 [95% CI 0.22, 0.27], and negatively with ill-being, r = -0.11 [-0.14, -0.08]. When the variety of extrinsic aspiration scoring methods were combined, the link with well-being was not statistically significant, r = 0.02 [-0.02, 0.06]. However, when extrinsic aspirations were evaluated in terms of their predominance in the overall pattern of aspiring the effect was universally detrimental, linking negatively to well-being, r = -0.22 [-0.32, -0.11], and positively to ill-being, r = 0.23 [0.17, 0.30]. Meta-analytic conclusions about the associations between goal types and wellness are important because they inform how individuals could shape aspirations to support their own happiness and how groups and institutions can frame goals such that their pursuit is for the common good. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

We sought to disambiguate the quantitative and qualitative components of mindfulness profiles, examine whether including ‘nonattachment’ as a subcomponent of mindfulness alters the profiles, and evaluate the extent to which the person–centred approach to understanding mindfulness adds predictive power beyond a more parsimonious variable–centred approach. Using data from a nationally representative sample of Americans ( N = 7884; 52% female; Age: M = 47.9, SD = 16), we utilized bifactor exploratory structural equation modelling and latent profile analysis to separate the level and shape of previously identified profiles of mindfulness (Pearson, Lawless, Brown, & Bravo, 2015). Consistent with past research, we identified a judgmentally observing profile and a non–judgmentally aware group, but inconsistent with past research, we did not find profiles that showed high or low levels on all specific aspects of mindfulness. Adding nonattachment did not alter the shape of the profiles. Profile membership was meaningfully related to demographic variables. In models testing the distinctive predictive utility of the profiles, the judgmentally observing profile, compared to the other profiles, showed the highest levels of mental ill–health, but also the highest levels of life satisfaction and effectiveness. We discuss the implications of our study for clinical interventions and understanding the varieties of mindfulness. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Personality Psychology

Self-determination theory's (SDT) dual process model claims that parental autonomy support relates positively to child well-being, while psychologically controlling parenting is linked positively to child ill-being. We tested these claims using a combination of one-stage and univariate meta-analytic structural equation modeling with moderation (k = 238; n = 1,040, N = 126,423). In the univariate models, parental autonomy support was linked positively with child well-being, r = 0.30, 95% CI [0.26, 0.33], whereas parental psychological control was positively linked with child ill-being, r = 0.26, 95% CI [0.23, 0.28]. Consistent with SDT's dual process model, the one-stage model that controlled for the intercorrelations between predictors showed that parental autonomy support and psychological control had distinct links to child wellness outcomes. Parental autonomy support was linked positively with child well-being, even when accounting for psychological control, r = 0.26, 95% CI [0.20, 0.31], and parental psychological control was positively linked to child ill-being, controlling for autonomy support, r = 0.20, 95% CI [0.17, 0.23]. Crucially, the beneficial effects of parental autonomy support and the costs of psychological control applied across regions, degrees of national individualism and cultural hierarchy, as well as child developmental periods and sexes. These results help move the field beyond debates about whether autonomy is beneficial toward questions about manifestations of autonomy across groups and variations in its optimal support. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).