Autonomy and controlling support are two sides of the same coin

Sook Ning Chua

a,
, Nathan Wong
b
, Richard Koestner
b
a
HELP University, Wisma HELP, Jalan Dungun, 50490 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
b
McGill University, 1205 Dr. Peneld Avenue, Montreal, Quebec H3A 1B1, Canada
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 28 October 2013
Received in revised form 7 April 2014
Accepted 9 April 2014
Available online 7 May 2014
Keywords:
Culture
Support
Power distance
a b s t r a c t
Autonomy and controlling support are generally viewed as being on the two extreme ends of a contin-
uum and have been found to be negatively correlated with one another. Recent research and anecdotal
evidence hint that controlling guidance (such as exemplied by tiger parenting) may not always be per-
ceived and received negatively. We proposed that power distance moderates the endorsement of control-
ling strategies. We expected and found that in two studies, participants from Malaysia, a high power
distance culture, perceived controlling strategies more positively than North Americans, and their
endorsement of autonomy support was positively correlated with their endorsement of controlling sup-
port. There was no difference between North Americans and Malaysians in their endorsement of auton-
omy supportive strategies. The latter result supports self-determination theorys contention that
autonomy is universally important. The results suggest that for individuals who value power distance,
autonomy and controlling practices are not necessarily seen as opposed, rather just alternate methods
of providing support or guidance. In addition, we tested this hypothesis using power distance on an indi-
vidual level in both cultures and again found the power distance inuenced the endorsement of control-
ling strategies. This study highlights cross cultural and individual differences in acceptance and perceived
benets of controlling support.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Over the past decades, self-determination theory (SDT) has con-
sistently found that autonomy support, a style of support intended
to nurture motivational resources, leads to myriad of positive out-
comes from goal progress to academic achievement to better men-
tal health (e.g. Joussemet, Koestner, Lekes, & Landry, 2005; Powers,
Koestner, & Gorin, 2008; Ryan, Deci, Grolnick, & La Guardia, 2006;
Vansteenkiste, Simons, Lens, Soenens, & Matos, 2005). In contrast,
controlling guidance, where an individual uses external means
such as rewards or punishment to motivate, has been negatively
associated with such outcomes (e.g. Roth, Assor, Niemiec, Ryan, &
Deci, 2009; Soenens, Park, Vansteenkiste, & Mouratidis, 2012). Fur-
thermore, many studies have shown that the benets of autonomy
support appear to generalize across different cultures (e.g. Cheon,
Reeve, & Moon, 2012; Chirkov, Ryan, Kim, & Kaplan, 2003;
Downie et al., 2007; Lynch, La Guardia, & Ryan, 2009). These
studies however, have primarily focused on showing the universal
benet of autonomy support regardless of the structure of the soci-
ety. Although autonomy support appears to be benecial across
cultures, we suggest that the perception of controlling support
may be culturally specic. That is, we expect that certain cultural
values may lead people in hierarchical positions to continue using
controlling strategies and recipients to continue to endorse such
strategies. Specically, we suggest that cultures and individuals
who value power distance (which see unequal power between
groups as justied) are more likely to endorse controlling strate-
gies and view controlling strategies positively than cultures and
individuals who do not value power distance.
A recent book by Amy Chua (2011), a Law professor at Yale Uni-
versity, entitled Tiger Mom exemplies the types of strategies that
are traditionally admired and emulated in Eastern cultures. For
example, many Chinese parents emphasize rote repetition, which
most children are not intrinsically motivated to do and conse-
quently rebel against. To counter this resistance, many Chinese
parents rely on directives and punishments to bring about the
desired behavior (Chua, 2013). When her book was rst published
in North America, many in the West spoke up against her parenting
practices, claiming that it was harmful and controlling. Although
past studies have shown that in general controlling strategies are
perceived negatively even among Asians (e.g. Kim, Wang,
Orozco-Lapray, Shen, & Murtuza, 2013), few studies have consid-
ered that the recipients values and endorsement of such parenting
practices as a potential moderator of the consequences of
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.04.008
0191-8869/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +60 19 470 0503.

E-mail address: sook.ning@help.edu.my (S.N. Chua).
Personality and Individual Differences 68 (2014) 4852
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ pai d
controlling support. Anecdotally it seems that controlling parent-
ing is effective for certain individuals. For example, Sophia, Amy
Chuas eldest daughters responded to the criticismby emphasizing
that she felt loved and supported by her mother, despite being
brought up in what some perceive to be a controlling environment
(Chua-Rubenfeld, 2011). On the other hand, Louisa, her youngest
daughters rebellion escalated to the point that Chua felt that she
had to modify her parenting practices or she would risk losing
the relationship (Gray, 2012; Hodson, 2011).
A potential moderator for the acceptance or rejection of this
support style is power distance, which is the extent to which cul-
tures prioritize and maintain egalitarian vs. hierarchical managing
styles (Hofstede, 1980). For people who accept power-distance val-
ues, individuals who are higher in status are perceived to be legit-
imate agents of social control. Power distance has been associated
with high status members being more likely to be critical of a low
status member and that low status members more likely to accept
criticism (Bond, Wan, Leung, & Giacalone, 1985). Other recent lines
of research have found that in domains and cultures (e.g. India vs.
USA) where parents were viewed as legitimate authority gures,
parents tended to exhibit more controlling behaviors and such
controlling support was more acceptable to the recipient
(Chauhan, 2013; Mauras, Grolnick, & Friendly, 2013). In sum, when
an individual is perceived to be a legitimate gure of authority,
exercising that authority in a controlling manner is more accept-
able to the recipient.
The primary question of this study is whether power distance is
associated with the acceptance of controlling support. In Study 1,
we recruited individuals from a high power distance country,
Malaysia, which rated the highest in power distance among the
original 53 countries studied by Hofstede (1980), and compared
the results to past studies conducted with Western samples;
namely, Deci, Schwartz, Sheinman, and Ryan (1981) and Reeve,
Bolt, and Cai (1999). In Study 2, we compared Malaysians and
North Americans (Canadians and Americans, both cultures which
are low in power distance) in their perception of controlling strat-
egies. In addition, we also looked at whether power distance as an
individual difference variable would predict endorsement of con-
trolling strategies in each culture. We expected to nd that power
distance would be associated with greater acceptance of control-
ling strategies at both the group- and individual-level. It is impor-
tant to note that based on past research that found that parental
autonomy support is associated with positive outcomes among
Malaysians (Downie et al., 2007), we expected that autonomy sup-
port to be viewed positively. This study goes beyond past research
that focused on the benets of autonomy support and the ills of
controlling support by looking at who is more likely to endorse
controlling support.
2. Study 1
2.1. Method
One hundred and thirty-ve participants [Females = 102,
M
age
= 22.11 (SD = 4.97)] from a Malaysian university completed
the online study in exchange for course credit. To examine which
strategies Malaysians are more likely to endorse as appropriate,
participants completed the Problems in Schools Questionnaire
(Deci et al., 1981). Each vignette described a situation where a sub-
ordinate was performing poorly in some respect, along with 4
motivational strategies the superior could use to respond to the sit-
uation and motivate their subordinate. Out of the 4 motivational
strategies, each vignette contained a highly autonomy supportive
(HA), a moderately autonomy supportive (MA), a moderately con-
trolling strategy (MC), and a highly controlling strategy (HC).
Participants rated the degree to which each strategy was appropri-
ate, along a 7-point scale (1 = not at all appropriate, 7 = very appro-
priate). Past research has found that the MA subscale is
consistently positively correlated with controlling strategies and
control orientation and thus is treated as a slightly controlling
strategy (as opposed to moderately autonomous) (Deci et al.,
1981; Reeve et al., 1999). In addition, for each option, participants
were asked to rate the extent to which each option would contrib-
ute to the individuals well-being (personal happiness and psycho-
logical growth) and success in life. The reliability of the four
subscales, respectively were .65, .64, .63 and .63.
2.2. Results
The means, standard deviations and correlations are reported in
Table 1. Participants ranked HA as the most appropriate response
and HC as the least appropriate response. This is consistent with
past research using Western participants showing that HA strate-
gies were rated most appropriate and HC strategies were rated
the least appropriate, with MC and MA being somewhere in
between (Deci et al., 1981; Reeve et al., 1999). We conducted
paired samples t-tests and all means were signicantly different
from each other (all p < .05), with the exception of MA and MC.
Likewise, participants rated the HA response as most likely to lead
to well-being and success and HC response to be least likely to lead
to well-being and success. We also conducted paired sample t-tests
to test mean differences for ratings of the likelihood each strategy
would lead to well-being and to success. For well-being scores, all
means were signicantly different from each other (all p < .05). For
success scores, all means were signicantly different from each
other (all p < .05) except between MA and MC. Thus far, the results
are consistent with the ndings from past research using Western
samples. HA was seen as the most appropriate strategy, most likely
to lead to well-being and success while HC was seen as the least
appropriate strategy, least likely to lead to well-being and success.
2.2.1. Within-scale correlations
In general, the results showed a simplex-like pattern of correla-
tions, in that each subscale correlated more strongly with adjacent
subscales than with distant subscales. The correlations however,
supported our hypothesized cultural difference in that HA was pos-
itively correlated with all other controlling options. The pattern
was similar for judgments of how motivating strategies would
relate to success and well-being, in that, ratings of HA as a strategy
that leads to well-being and success was positively correlated with
ratings of HC as a strategy that leads to well-being and success
respectively. Therefore even though HA strategies were rated as
the most appropriate, most likely to lead to success and most likely
to lead to well-being among all the other options, the within scale
correlations did not replicate the correlational matrix found in
Deci, Connell, and Ryan (1989) and Reeve et al. (1999). Despite rat-
ing HA as the most appropriate option, the highly autonomous
option was not seen as the converse of highly controlling options,
but rather one of many other options, albeit the best option.
2.2.2. Between-scale correlations
The more participants rated one strategy as appropriate, the
more highly they rated it as leading to well-being and success. That
is, ratings of HA as an appropriate option was positively related to
ratings of HA as leading to well-being and success, and the pattern
was replicated for the other 3 scales respectively. In other words,
this suggests that each option was chosen because the participants
perceived that it brought most benets to the recipient. However,
consistent with the hypothesis that Malaysians are more accepting
of controlling strategies, ratings of HA as an appropriate strategy
was positively correlated with rating controlling strategies as
S.N. Chua et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 68 (2014) 4852 49
benecial, particularly in terms of success (correlations between
.12 and .27) and to a lesser degree for well-being (correlations
between .05 and .23). Therefore even when Malaysians endorsed
HA most strongly overall, they perceive controlling options as
being benecial to the recipient as well.
2.3. Discussion
The pattern of means and the simplex pattern of correlations
validate the structure of the scale, and are consistent with the
understanding that autonomy and control lie along a continuum.
The results of Study 1 revealed that as expected, HA is viewed pos-
itively by Malaysians and a preferred strategy over controlling
strategies. However, contrary to past ndings with Western
samples (Deci et al., 1989), the extreme points on the continuum
(HA and HC) were positively correlated. This indicates that for
Malaysians, being autonomous and being controlling do not lie
on opposite ends of the spectrum, rather, they are perceived just
as different ways to support others.
3. Study 2
In Study 2, we wanted to replicate the results of Study 1 and
compare the results with a North American sample. In addition,
we also looked at the extent to which high autonomy vs. high con-
trolling support is perceived to lead to autonomous motivation.
When values are integrated in an autonomous manner, they are
consistent and coherent with other values, such that there is min-
imal intrapsychic conict (Deci & Ryan, 2000). This allows the indi-
vidual to be fully self-determined and autonomous in carrying out
his/her actions, acting because these values and behaviors are per-
sonally meaningful and important. Our results from Study 1 sug-
gests that even if Malaysians view HA as most likely to lead to
autonomous motivation, they will also see controlling strategies
as appropriate. On the other hand, we expect that North Americans
will hold a more dichotomous view such that those who view HA
as enhancing autonomous motivation will not view controlling
strategies as fostering autonomous motivation. Thus we expected
that the endorsement of HA to be positively related to controlling
strategies (MA, MC and HC) for Malaysians but not North Ameri-
cans. Finally, we expected that within cultures, individuals who
endorsed high power distance relationships were more likely to
accept controlling methods than individuals who endorsed low
power distance relationships.
3.1. Method
Four hundred and sixty-four people participated in the online
study. Two hundred and eighty were undergraduates attending
HELP University, a private English language university in Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia. The other 184 were from North America. The
North American participants were recruited from McGill Univer-
sity in Montreal or through MTurk. The participants from Malaysia
received course credit for their participation. Some of the partici-
pants from McGill participated in order to be entered into a draw
to win $100, while the rest received a small payment from the
Amazon Mechanical Turk program. Although the participants from
MTurk were older (M
age
= 33.81) than those from McGill
(M
age
= 22.29), there was no difference between participants from
McGill and from MTurk on the other dependent and independent
variables. As we wanted to examine the differences between cul-
tures, we selected only participants who currently resided in North
America. The nal sample consisted of n = 154 [Females = 103;
M
age
= 29.95 (SD = 13.36)] from North American and n = 280
[Females = 181; M
age
= 20.60 (SD = 1.79)] from Malaysia. Partici-
pants from both countries completed the questionnaires in English.
3.1.1. Perception of supportive behaviors
Participants were presented with 6 vignettes: 3 from the Prob-
lems in Schools Questionnaire (PIS) (Deci et al., 1981), and 3 from
the Problems at Work Questionnaire (PAW) (Deci et al., 1989). The
PIS and PAW are similar in structure except the vignettes ask what
should a teacher do vs. what should an employer do. Consistent
with the ndings of Reeve et al. (1999), the MA scale was corre-
lated with the controlling subscales in both cultures, indicating
that this is a slightly controlling strategy. The reliabilities of the
subscales, respectively, were .72, .62, .56 and .58 for the Malaysian
sample, and 77, .67, .70 and .72 for the North American sample.
3.1.2. Motivation
For four of the vignettes, participants were asked to consider
the HA and HC option and rate on a 5-point scale (1 = No,
3 = Maybe, 5 = Yes) the extent to which HA and HC would lead to
autonomous motivation (e.g. Will this help your child develop a
genuine love for learning?).
3.1.3. Power distance
Power distance was measured using 4 items from a 6-point
scale (1 = Strongly disagree, 6 = Strongly agree) that was developed
by Brockner et al. (2001). A sample item is People are better off not
Table 1
Means, standard deviations and correlations of major study variables in Study 1.
Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1. HA 5.66 .60
2. MA 6.25 .72 .30
**

3. MC 6.63 .73 .17

.61
**

4. HC 6.38 .77 .20

*
.55
**
.70
**

5. HAwb 5.71 .73 .81

**
.26
**
.08 .16
6. MAwb 4.72 .81 .23
*
.81
**
.48
**
.47
**
.42
**

7. MCwb 4.32 .85 .05 .44

**
.77
**
.57
**
.19
*
.57
**

8. HCwb 4.00 .83 .06 .44

**
.58
**
.79
**
.20
*
.55
**
.69
**

9. HAsuc 5.70 .69 .77

**
.23
*
.18

.15 .81
**
.39
**
.22
*
.13
10. MAsuc 5.00 .85 .27
**
.80
**
.55
**
.55
**
.38
**
.79
**
.44
**
.48
**
.37
**

11. MCsuc 5.01 .88 .20

*
.52
**
.81
**
.63
**
.26
**
.46
**
.66
**
.56
**
.31
**
.34
**

12. HCsuc 4.32 .93 .12 .41

**
.57
**
.80
**
.18
*
.39
**
.43
**
.72
**
.16 .60
**
.67
**

Note: HA = Highly Autonomous, MA = Moderately Autonomous, MC = Moderately Controlling, HC = Highly Controlling, WB = Well-being, Suc = Success.

p < .07.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
50 S.N. Chua et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 68 (2014) 4852
questioning the decisions of those in authority. The reliability of the
scale was .67 for Malaysians and .77 for North Americans.
3.2. Results
Means, standard deviations and correlations are reported in
Table 2. We also reported the results of the independent samples
T-tests examining mean differences between the Malaysian and
North American samples in Table 2. The results revealed the
expected simplex pattern of correlations such that subscales that
were closely related were more highly correlated with one another
than with distant subscales on the continuum. However, as in
Study 1, HA was signicantly positively correlated with the con-
trolling scales for the Malaysian sample. This suggests that Malay-
sians distinguish less between autonomy supportive and
controlling strategies even though they prefer highly autonomy
supportive strategies. On the other hand, HA was not related to
controlling strategies for the North Americans and although not
signicant, the direction of the relationship with HC was negative.
To control for the difference in age between our samples and to
examine cross cultural differences, we conducted a series of hierar-
chical regressions to examine the inuence of power distance on
the dependent variables of interest (Table 3). There was a main
effect on HA and MA, such that Malaysians were more likely to
view HA strategies as appropriate, and North Americans were more
likely to view MA strategies as appropriate. Importantly, across
cultures personal orientation of power distance was signicantly
positively related to the endorsement of controlling strategies,
and perceiving controlling strategies as fostering autonomous
motivation.
There were two marginally signicant interactions between
power distance and culture on HA strategy and the extent to which
HA was perceived as fostering autonomous motivation. Simple
slopes were tested according to the code provided by Preacher,
Curran, and Bauer (2006). Power distance was more negatively
related to HA for North American participants (t = 4.30, p < .01),
as compared to the Malaysian participants (t = 2.26, p < .05).
Power distance was also negatively related to perceiving HA as
leading to autonomous motivation for North American participants
(t = 2.28, p < . 05) but not for the Malaysian participants (t = .20).
4. Discussion
To our knowledge, this is one of the few studies to examine
cross-cultural differences in the endorsement of controlling strate-
gies. This study seeks to answer the question why some people are
more likely to endorse controlling strategies. We proposed power
distance as a group- and an individual- level moderator of endorse-
ment of controlling strategies. Power distance is the extent to
which individuals and cultures accept and endorse a hierarchical
order (Hofstede, 1980). We expected that those who are high in
power distance were more likely to nd controlling support
acceptable, but that there would be no difference in acceptance
of autonomy support. We also examined the perceived associations
of autonomous and controlling support.
Consistent with past research that autonomy support is associ-
ated with positive outcomes across cultures, we found that North
Americans and Malaysians rated HA as the most appropriate strat-
egy and HC as the least appropriate strategy. HA was also rated
most highly in terms of leading to success, well-being and autono-
mous motivation. The simplex pattern correlations supported the
theoretical structure of the continuum and the placement of the
subscales. In support of our hypothesis, Malaysians were more
accepting of controlling strategies compared to North Americans.
In addition, endorsement of HA strategies was positively related
to perception of controlling strategies as benecial in terms of
well-being, success and autonomous motivation. The results indi-
cate that even when autonomy support is perceived as the most
preferable, controlling support is still seen as benecial by Malay-
sians. On the other hand, North Americans were more likely to dis-
tinguish between autonomy supportive and controlling strategies.
Support for HA strategies was negatively related with controlling
strategies (MA, MC and HC) and unrelated to the perception of con-
trolling strategies as benecial. Finally, within cultures, the more
highly someone valued power distance, the more they perceived
controlling strategies as appropriate and promoting autonomous
motivation. This suggests that a provider of controlling support
may not necessarily be a harsh and mean individual trying to
demean the recipient, but trying to in his/her own way autono-
mously motivate the recipient.
Table 2
Means, standard deviations, T-test values and correlations of major study variables in Study 2.
Malaysia North America t(432) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. PD 3.09 (.85) 2.60 (.96) 5.50
**
.14
*
.25
**
.16
**
.30
**
.02 .41
**
2. HA 5.97 (.59) 5.92 (.74) .88 .33
**
.30
**
.22
**
.23
**
.50
**
.07
3. MA 4.89 (.75) 4.55 (.92) 4.19
**
.30
**
.11 .52
**
.46
**
.18
**
.30
**
4. MC 4.64 (.76) 4.48 (.97) 2.00
*
.26
**
.13 .61
**
.55
**
.12
*
.31
**
5. HC 4.63 (.78) 4.40 (1.05) 2.58
*
.34
**
.04 .53
**
.63
**
.09 .52
**
6. AMHA 3.96 (.63) 3.71 (.64) 3.90
**
.19
*
.52
**
.05 .02 .12 .04
7. AMHC 2.35 (.70) 2.24 (.78) 1.49 .54
**
21
**
.47
**
.47
**
.62
**
.11
Note: PD = Power distance, HA = Highly Autonomous, MA (SC) = Moderately Autonomous (Slightly Controlling), MC = Moderately Controlling, HC = Highly Controlling,
AMHA = Autonomous Motivation of Highly Autonomous strategies, AMHC = Autonomous Motivation of Highly Controlling strategies.
The correlations for the Malaysian sample are reported above the diagonal line and the correlations for the North American sample are reported below the diagonal line.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
Table 3
Predictors of Autonomous and Controlling strategies.
HA MA MC HC AMHA AMHC
Constant 1.01
**
.99
**
.96
**
.98
**
1.07
**
.94
**
Age .00 .01 .03 .02 .07
**
.00
Gender (0 = Female) .02
**
.01 .00 .00 .01 .01
Culture (0 = Malaysian) .02
*
.03
*
.02 .01 .03
*
.02
PD .02
*
.04
*
.03
*
.05
**
.00 .13
**
PD Culture .01
+
.01 .02 .02 .02
+
.02
Note: For claritys sake, only Model 2 standardized regression coefcients are
reported.
PD = Power distance, HA = Highly Autonomous, MA (SC) = Moderately Autonomous
(Slightly Controlling), MC = Moderately Controlling, HC = Highly Controlling,
AMHA = Autonomous Motivation of Highly Autonomous strategies,
AMHC = Autonomous Motivation of Highly Controlling strategies.
+
p < .06.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
S.N. Chua et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 68 (2014) 4852 51
One of the limitations of this study is that it focused mainly on
perception of controlling support and did not examine the actual
practice or the consequences of that perception. We do expect that
controlling support is not as benecial as autonomous support but
it may be that controlling management practices may not have
such aversive consequences for those high in power distance orien-
tation compared to those low in power distance orientation. Those
who accept and endorse a hierarchy order may see those in author-
ity as more legitimate, and therefore be more likely to view their
controlling support as acceptable. Indeed, a recent study found that
high power distance orientation individuals were accepting of abu-
sive supervision because they saw their treatment as less unfair as
compared to those who were low in power distance orientation
(Lian, Ferris, & Brown, 2012).
We suggest that the threshold of whether a behavior is per-
ceived as controlling is raised for high power distance oriented
individuals. In other words, when support is experienced as con-
trolling, it is associated with negative outcomes, but what is typi-
cally viewed as mildly or even moderately controlling may not
be experienced as such by a high power distance orientation indi-
vidual, particularly when coming from a superior. On a broader
level, individuals rely on cultural norms to inform them on
whether a behavior is controlling or not. For instance, participants
from the Peoples Republic of China (a high power distance culture
where a lack of voice is normative) were less dissatised with lack-
ing voice, or input to decisional processes as compared to partici-
pants from United States (low power distance cultures where a
voice is normative) (Brockner et al., 2001). However, when partic-
ipants were primed with a countercultural state, participants from
India (a high power distance culture) were more dissatised with
their lack of voice (van den Bos, Brockner, van den Oudenalder,
Kamble, & Nasabi, 2013). Thus, beliefs and cultural norms inuence
peoples perception of the continuum of support (autonomous to
controlling).
An interesting future direction is to examine the consequences
of their acceptance of controlling strategies. Is controlling support
only controlling when the recipient perceives the support to be
controlling or is there an objective standard of controlling support?
If support is dened by perception, high power distance oriented
individuals may be buffered from some of the negative conse-
quences of controlling support by their perception and thus accep-
tance of the support. However, if controlling support is dened as a
psychologically need thwarting environment (Bartholomew,
Ntoumanis, Ryan, Bosch, & Thgersen-Ntoumani, 2011; Deci &
Ryan, 2000; Marbell & Grolnick, 2013), regardless of whether an
individual accepts it, they will not thrive and ourish under such
conditions, even if they do not suffer from ill-health. Moreover,
their perception might also lead to the justication and mainte-
nance of a need thwarting environment (Deci & Ryan, 2000).
References
Bartholomew, K. J., Ntoumanis, N., Ryan, R. M., Bosch, J. A., & Thgersen-Ntoumani,
C. (2011). Self-determination theory and diminished functioning the role of
interpersonal control and psychological need thwarting. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 37, 14591473.
Bond, M. H., Wan, K. C., Leung, K., & Giacalone, R. A. (1985). How are responses to
verbal insult related to cultural collectivism and power distance? Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16(1), 111127.
Brockner, J., Ackerman, G., Greenberg, J., Gelfand, M. J., Francesco, A. M., Chen, Z. X.,
et al. (2001). Culture and procedural justice: The inuence of power distance on
reactions to voice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 300315.
Chauhan, & Goyal. (2013). Internalization of norms and justication for parental
reasoning in adolescent-parent conicts: A cross cultural study. Poster session
presented at the meeting of Self-Determination theory, Rochester.
Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J. M., & Moon, I. S. (2012). Experimentally based, longitudinally
designed, teacher-focused intervention to help physical education teachers be
more autonomy supportive toward their students. Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 34, 365396.
Chirkov, V., Ryan, R. M., Kim, Y., & Kaplan, U. (2003). Differentiating autonomy from
individualism and independence: A self-determination theory perspective on
internalization of cultural orientations and well-being. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 84(1), 97.
Chua, A. (2013). Battle hymn of the tiger mom. NY: The Penguin Press.
Chua-Rubenfeld, S. (2011). Why I love my strict Chinese mom. New York Post.
Retrieved from: http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/
why_love_my_strict_chinese_mom_uUvfmLcA5eteY0u2KXt7hM.
Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Self-determination in a work
organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 580.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The what and why of goal pursuits: Human needs
and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227268.
Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A. J., Sheinman, L., & Ryan, R. M. (1981). An instrument to
assess adults orientations toward control versus autonomy with children:
Reections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 73(5), 642.
Downie, M., Chua, S. N., Koestner, R., Barrios, M. F., Rip, B., & MBirkou, S. (2007). The
relations of parental autonomy support to cultural internalization and well-
being of immigrants and sojourners. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority
Psychology, 13(3), 241.
Gray, E. (2012). Amy Chua, tiger mom, has changed 1 year after Battle hymn of the
tiger mother. Hufngton Post. Retrieved from: http://www.hufngtonpost.com/
2012/01/10/amy-chua-tiger-mom-book-one-year-later_n_1197066.html.
Hodson, H. (2011). Amy Chua: Im going to take all your stuffed animals and burn
them!. The Guardian. Retrieved from: http://www.theguardian.com/
lifeandstyle/2011/jan/15/amy-chua-tiger-mother-interview.
Hofstede, Geert (1980). Cultures consequences: International differences in work-
related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Joussemet, M., Koestner, R., Lekes, N., & Landry, R. (2005). A longitudinal study of
the relationship of maternal autonomy support to childrens adjustment and
achievement in school. Journal of Personality, 73(5), 12151236.
Kim, S. Y., Wang, Y., Orozco-Lapray, D., Shen, Y., & Murtuza, M. (2013). Does tiger
parenting exist? Parenting proles of Chinese Americans and adolescent
developmental outcomes. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 4(1), 7.
Lian, H. W., Ferris, D. L., & Brown, D. J. (2012). Does power distance exacerbate or
mitigate the effects of abusive supervision? It depends on the outcome. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 97, 107123.
Lynch, M. F., La Guardia, J. G., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). On being yourself in different
cultures: Ideal and actual self-concept, autonomy support, and well-being in
China, Russia, and the United States. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(4),
290304.
Marbell, K. N., & Grolnick, W. S. (2013). Correlates of parental control and autonomy
support in an interdependent culture: A look at Ghana. Motivation and Emotion,
37(1), 7992.
Mauras, C. P., Grolnick, W. S., & Friendly, R. W. (2013). Time for The Talk... Now
what? Autonomy support and structure in motherdaughter conversations
about sex. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 33(4), 458481.
Powers, T. A., Koestner, R., & Gorin, A. A. (2008). Autonomy support from family and
friends and weight loss in college women. Families, Systems, & Health, 26(4),
404.
Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing
interaction effects in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent
curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 437448.
Reeve, J., Bolt, E., & Cai, Y. (1999). Autonomy-supportive teachers: How they teach
and motivate students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 537.
Roth, G., Assor, A., Niemiec, C. P., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2009). The emotional and
academic consequences of parental conditional regard: Comparing conditional
positive regard, conditional negative regard, and autonomy support as
parenting practices. Developmental Psychology, 45(4), 1119.
Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., Grolnick, W. S., & La Guardia, J. G. (2006). The signicance of
autonomy and autonomy support in psychological development and
psychopathology. In D. Cicchetti, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental
psychopathology: Theory and method (2nd ed.) (Vol. 1, pp. 795849). New
Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Soenens, B., Park, S. Y., Vansteenkiste, M., & Mouratidis, A. (2012). Perceived
parental psychological control and adolescent depressive experiences: A cross-
cultural study with Belgian and South-Korean adolescents. Journal of
Adolescence, 35(2), 261272.
van den Bos, K., Brockner, J., van den Oudenalder, M., Kamble, S. V., & Nasabi, A.
(2013). Delineating a method to study cross-cultural differences with
experimental control: The voice effect and countercultural contexts regarding
power distance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 624634.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Soenens, B., & Matos, L. (2005). Examining
the motivational impact of intrinsic versus extrinsic goal framing and
autonomy-supportive versus internally controlling communication style on
early adolescents academic achievement. Child Development, 76(2), 483501.
52 S.N. Chua et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 68 (2014) 4852