Thuyết tự quyết, động lực học tập và sự gắn kết của người học: Trắc lượng thư mục từ dữ liệu Scopus và Web of Science
Tóm tắt
In the context of digital transformation in education, understanding student engagement through Self-Determination Theory is increasingly important. This study presents a bibliometric analysis of research on Self-Determination Theory, motivation, and student engagement from 2018 to 2025. Data from Scopus and Web of Science were integrated and standardized, resulting in 194 publications. Findings highlight a rapid growth in publication volume from 2024-2025, while citations peaking in 2022. Collaboration networks were centered around major research hubs, particularly China and the United States. Keyword analysis reveals a shift from traditional theoretical foundations toward digitally oriented applications, including online learning, e-learning, and gamification. The results provide a quantitative map of the field and identify emerging research directions, especially regarding autonomy-supportive practices in virtual environments. The study contributes a knowledge map providing empirical evidence of the central role of autonomy support in maintaining engagement within online and hybrid learning environments.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jbusres.2021.04.070
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Howard, J. L., Bureau, J. S., Guay, F., Chong, J. X. Y., & Ryan, R. M. (2021). Student motivation and associated outcomes: A meta-analysis from self-determination theory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(6), 1300-1323. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966789
Hulland, J. (2024). Bibliometric reviews - Some guidelines. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 52, 935-938. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-024-01016-x
Klarin, A. (2024). How to conduct a bibliometric content analysis: Guidelines and contributions of content co-occurrence or co-word literature reviews. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 48(2), e13031. https://doi.
org/10.1111/ijcs.13031
Kumpulainen, M., & Seppänen, M. (2022). Combining Web of Science and Scopus datasets in citation-based literature study. Scientometrics, 127(10), 5613-5631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04475-7
Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Donthu, N. (2024). How to combine and clean bibliometric data and use bibliometric tools synergistically: Guidelines using metaverse research. Journal of Business Research, 182, 114760. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114760
Marzi, G., Balzano, M., Caputo, A., & Pellegrini, M. M. (2025). Guidelines for bibliometric-systematic literature reviews: 10 steps to combine analysis, synthesis and theory development. International Journal of Management Reviews, 27(1), 81-103. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12381
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D.,... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372(71), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Reeve, J. (2006). Teachers as facilitators: What autonomy-supportive teachers do and why their students benefit. The Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 225-236. https://doi.org/10.1086/501484
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Vansteenkiste, M., Ryan, R. M., & Soenens, B. (2020). Basic psychological need theory: Advancements, critical themes, and future directions. Motivation and Emotion, 44(1), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-019-09818-1
Tải xuống
Đã Xuất bản
Cách trích dẫn
Số
Chuyên mục
Giấy phép
Bản quyền (c) 2026 Tạp chí Giáo dục
Tác phẩm này được cấp phép theo Ghi nhận tác giả của Creative Commons Giấy phép quốc tế 4.0 .
