The effectiveness of nudging interventions in sustainability transitions has been widely studied, as they guide consumer choices without restricting freedom of choice. However, in practice, actors such as retailers, event organizers, and policymakers often rely on more restrictive measures. These raise concerns about consumers' perceived autonomy, potentially hindering sustainable behavior. Research on how consumers react to restrictive measures and whether such measures facilitate or obstruct sustainable behavior change remains limited. This study addresses this gap by examining how consumers perceive threats to their autonomy in the context of sustainability-related restrictions. Drawing on self-determination and reactance theory, two online experiments (n=150; n=147) and a virtual reality study (n=53) investigated the effects of autonomy threat on choice satisfaction, compensatory behavior, and the mediating role of psychological reactance. Findings reveal that perceived threats to autonomy significantly reduce choice satisfaction, mediated by psychological reactance. Whether sustainable alternatives were alignable or non-alignable with less sustainable options did not influence this relationship. The results oft he virtual reality study pointed in the same direction, however, showing a significant link only between perceived autonomy threat and compensatory behavior. The results suggest that restrictive measures should be implemented with caution. Although such measures can effectively limit unsustainable behavior by constraining consumers' physical and social opportunities, they may also trigger unintended side effects, such as dissatisfaction or compensatory behaviors. Nevertheless, when restrictions are perceived as appropriate, offering the most sustainable alternatives—regardless of their similarity to less sustainable ones—appears most effective for promoting sustainable choices and satisfaction. Overall, this research provides valuable insights for policymakers and marketers seeking to foster sustainable behavior change. It highlights the importance of balancing effectiveness and autonomy to ensure that sustainability interventions not only drive behavioral change but also maintain consumer satisfaction.