Obsessive Passion: A Compensatory Response to Unsatisfied Needs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present research investigated the role of two sources of psychological need satisfaction (inside and outside a passionate activity) as determinants of harmonious (HP) and obsessive (OP) passion. Four studies were carried out with different samples of young and middle-aged adults (e.g., athletes, musicians; total N = 648). Different research designs (cross-sectional, mixed, longitudinal) were also used. Results showed that only a rigid engagement in a passionate activity (OP) was predicted by low levels of need satisfaction outside the passionate activity (in an important life context or in life in general), whereas both OP and a more favorable and balanced type of passion, HP were positively predicted by need satisfaction inside the passionate activity. Further, OP led to negative outcomes, and HP predicted positive outcomes. These results suggest that OP may represent a form of compensatory striving for psychological need satisfaction. It appears important to consider two distinct sources of need satisfaction, inside and outside the passionate activity, when investigating determinants of optimal and less optimal forms of activity engagement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it