Comments on abstract, title, references

Abstract The authors provide background information and the gap in knowledge by stating that they offer an integrative and fine-grained analysis of teachers’ classroom motivating style (i.e., autonomy support, structure, control, and chaos) to resolve existing controversies in the literature, such as how these dimensions relate to each other and to educationally important student and teacher outcomes. We are then told who the participants were and what was the method used. Then we are explained in more detail what the used method is and how it was applied. We are then given the key results that correlations between eight subareas and a variety of construct validation and outcome variables (e.g., student motivation, teacher burnout) followed an ordered sinusoid pattern. Also, a key comment is briefly provided that the discussion of this paper focuses on the conceptual implications and practical advantages of adopting a circumplex approach and sketches a number of important future research directions.

Title The title contains the key features of the article. However, the title might not be lucky to spot interest in a reader due to its draggy wording. Still, the title is an accurate representation of the paper.

References The references are cited and listed correctly. Also, the references are relevant and current.

Comments on introduction/background

The authors provide adequate review of the existing literature. Specifically, the authors provide logical progression from existing knowledge that leads their research question and highlight the important patterns. Also, the authors provide sufficient understanding what the paper is about. Most of the recent relevant and important studies are included. However, the authors are missing a previous study introducing multidimensionality of autonomy-supportive behaviour (Stefanou et al., 2004), but this is just a minor concern. All technical terms are explained in detail and systematically in Table 1. The authors also explain the value of the paper and why the reader should be interested. The authors also clearly state the gap in the research that they are looking to fill. The research problem is defined, and it is explained how it will advance our understanding of the topic and resolve confusions in the existing literature. Overall, the introduction is clear and concise.

Comments on methodology

The process of subject selection is clear. The participants of the study are optimally selected as the sample can be generalized and compared to other groups. Also, used variables are defined in detail and measured appropriately. The study methods are both valid and reliable. The authors report construct validity, predictive validity and internal validity as well as test-retest reliability and social desirability tendency. The authors provide enough detail for other researchers to replicate the study.

Comments on data and results

The data is presented in an appropriate way. The authors introduce three Figures and nine Tables in total which are all clearly presented. However, nine Figures are a bit too much and might confuse the reader. Authors are suggested to present Tables with less important information in the Appendix to keep focus on main results of the study. The data and results section is overall presented with appropriate units, rounding, and number of decimals. All the titles, columns, and rows are labelled correctly and clearly. Authors results section is mainly not repetitive of the Tables and Figures, but they help in understanding of the results. The authors are clear about statistically significant and practically meaningful results.

Comments on discussion and conclusions

The authors have discussed the results from multiple angles and placed it into proper context without being overinterpreted. Specifically, the authors begin their discussion by restating the association between their research, and existing knowledge. Then, the authors link their findings to previous studies, and the existing knowledge. Also, all the references used are relevant and appropriately comparable. All the aims and hypothesis are answered and discussed throughout the discussion step by step. All the conclusions made are supported by the study results and references. Finally, the limitations of the study are discussed, and they inform reader about opportunities for future research.