MetaSDTCenter for Self-Determination Theory logo
← Back to intervention studies
Intervention database

Mindfulness → autonomous motivation

Intervention studies from a systematic review and meta-analysis of mindfulness and motivation, framed in self-determination theory. Interventions are mindfulness trainings; outcomes are autonomous forms of motivation (intrinsic and identified), measured post-intervention or at follow-up against control conditions or pre-intervention baselines.

Source

Donald, J. N., Bradshaw, E. L., Ryan, R. M., Basarkod, G., Ciarrochi, J., Duineveld, J. J., Guo, J., & Sahdra, B. K. (2020). Mindfulness and its association with varied types of motivation: A systematic review and meta-analysis using self-determination theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(7), 1121–1138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219896136

Studies
21
Effects
28
Total N
3,982

Pooled effects

Estimates as published in the source article's intervention-effects results (multilevel random-effects models); the analysis dataset behind the download reproduces them exactly. Study and effect counts and Ns are taken from that dataset (N = participants contributing to each estimate; the article's stated intervention total of N = 3,982 reflects total study samples).

All intervention studies (intrinsic + identified motivation)
d = 0.4795% CI [0.28, 0.67]21 studies · 28 effects · N = 1,572
SubgroupStudiesEffectsNd95% CI
Motivation type
Intrinsic motivation17241,2510.54[0.33, 0.76]
Identified motivation443210.20[-0.15, 0.55]

Study effects

Reproduces Figure 7 of the source article: each study's effect (square, sized by precision) with its 95% confidence interval, grouped by motivation type, with pooled estimates as diamonds. Computed from the analysis dataset; the figure's "integrated" label is corrected to "identified" here, matching the article's text.

0.01.02.0Cohen's dINTRINSIC MOTIVATIONAherne et al., 20111.55 [0.25, 2.85]Aikens et al., 20140.42 [0.00, 0.84]Brown et al., 2016 — ES 10.85 [0.18, 1.51]Brown et al., 2016 — ES 20.61 [−0.04, 1.26]Coo & Salanova, 20170.88 [0.16, 1.59]Davis, 20151.02 [0.37, 1.67]Enríquez et al., 20170.35 [0.01, 0.69]Gouda et al., 2016 — ES 10.35 [−0.38, 1.08]Gouda et al., 2016 — ES 20.24 [−0.49, 0.97]Klatt et al., 20170.19 [−0.24, 0.63]Koncz et al., 2016 — ES 10.41 [−0.13, 0.96]Koncz et al., 2016 — ES 2−0.12 [−0.66, 0.42]Koncz et al., 2016 — ES 30.63 [0.08, 1.19]Moir et al., 20160.06 [−0.20, 0.32]Scott-Hamilton & Schutte, 20161.31 [0.42, 2.21]Scott-Hamilton et al., 20160.20 [−0.38, 0.78]Van Berkel et al., 2014 — ES 10.00 [−0.24, 0.24]Van Berkel et al., 2014 — ES 2−0.11 [−0.36, 0.13]Verweij et al., 20161.12 [0.51, 1.73]Wilson, 20130.81 [0.26, 1.37]Wilson, 2014 — ES 11.21 [0.63, 1.79]Wilson, 2014 — ES 20.38 [−0.16, 0.92]Wilson, 20151.02 [0.45, 1.60]Zhang et al., 20161.49 [0.81, 2.17]Pooled — intrinsic motivation0.54 [0.33, 0.76]IDENTIFIED MOTIVATIONBach & Guse, 20150.32 [−0.24, 0.87]Foukal et al., 2016−0.29 [−0.65, 0.06]Kearney et al., 20140.38 [−0.05, 0.81]Pinto-Gouveia et al., 20160.55 [0.04, 1.06]Pooled — identified motivation0.20 [−0.15, 0.55]Pooled — all intervention studies0.47 [0.28, 0.67]

Data

Standardized CSV of the intervention effects coded in the authors' analysis dataset (28 effects from 21 samples). Two coded moderators (control_code, direct_code) are passed through as in the authors' file, as their labels are not documented in the article.

Download CSV