Similar but different: Profiling secondary school students based on their perceived motivational climate and psychological need-based experiences in physical education

vary [31]. It is therefore desirable to separate the aims or targets of the goals (‘what’) from the underlying reasons or goal motivation (‘why’) [21,23]. A framework that is eminently suitable for studying why people display certain behaviours is the self-determination theory. Self-determination theory. Self-determination theory (SDT) conceptualizes students’ autonomous motivation as pursuing goals because they find them interesting, enjoyable or exciting (i.e., intrinsic motivation), because the goal is in alignment with the values and norms of the student (i.e., integrated motivation), or because the student perceives personal relevance (i.e., identified motivation). In contrast, pursuing goals in order to avoid feelings of guilt (introjected motivation), or in order to obtain rewards or avoid negative consequence (exter- nal motivation) is referred to as controlled motivation [32]. Finally, when intentionality and energy or desire to act is missing, due to lack of concern or valuation of the activity, or the lack of perceived competence or positive efficacy beliefs, this is referred to as amotivation [6,33]. Previous studies in the context of PE showed that autonomous forms of motivation (i.e., intrinsic motivation, integrated motivation, identified motivation) can be associated with more adaptive cognitive, affective and behavioural outcomes than controlled motivation (Ael- terman et al., 2016). Autonomously motivated students show more PA [6,34,35], concentra- tion [36], effort, engagement and persistence [37] during PE lessons. In contrast, students who

feel internally or externally pressured (controlled motivation) show less adaptive outcomes during PE classes, such as lower engagement [34], boredom, and unhappiness [38,39]. Amoti- vation relates negatively to effort [40], rated engagement [34], and well-being [38]. The prerequisite for autonomous motivation is the satisfaction of three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence and relatedness [18,41]. Autonomy refers to regulation by the self. Competence refers to the need to experience some level of effectiveness and confidence. The concept of relatedness refers to the need to feel connected with others, to feel included and cared for by others. When these needs are satisfied students are more likely to be driven by autonomous forms of motivation. Whereas the frustration of these needs will result in the feel- ings of pressure and being forced to participate in PE (i.e., autonomy frustration), the feeling of failure and being incompetent to deal effectively with the situation (i.e., competence frustra- tion) and feelings of loneliness and being disconnected from others (i.e., relatedness frustra- tion). In these circumstances, the student will more likely participate in PE on basis of more controlling motives [42,43]. Need satisfaction and need frustration must be considered as sep- arate constructs and do not necessarily fall along a single continuum as opposites [42,44]. In other words, high need satisfaction does not automatically imply low need frustration. The (social) learning environment created by the PE teacher (i.e., motivational climate)

[45] has the potential to influence student motivational regulations for participating in PE by fostering the experiences of need satisfaction and prevent need frustration during PE lessons [46,36,47]. Previous studies showed that need-supportive teaching behaviour relates positively to autonomous (high-quality) forms of motivation for PE (e.g. [48]) and to subsequent positive outcomes, including enjoyment in PE (e.g. [49]). In contrast, need thwarting teacher behav- iours are related to controlled motivation and maladaptive student outcomes [44]. In order to optimise the match between the learning environment and the motivational demands of stu- dents, the similarities and differences between students should be taken into account. Motivational profiling. In motivational profiling, separate motivational dimensions are organized into profiles representing naturally occurring combinations of these dimensions within subgroups of individuals [31]. By identifying the common characteristics of the profiles, this enables tailoring interventions to the different needs and wants of specific groups [50]. In the context of PE, this approach of identifying different groups may allow for the identification of groups of students that need extra guidance or attention. Profiling could increase the effi- ciency and effectiveness of teacher interventions and enhance students’ engagement across Similar but different PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228859 February 10, 2020 3 / 17