MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119818578 · doi:10.1177/0146167201278002

Need Satisfaction, Motivation, and Well-Being in the Work Organizations of a Former Eastern Bloc Country: A Cross-Cultural Study of Self-Determination

2001· article· en· W2119818578 on OpenAlexaff
Edward L. Deci, Richard M. Ryan, Marylène Gagné, Dean R. Leone, Julian Usunov, Boyanka P. Kornazheva

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyStructural equation modelingCollectivismWork motivationPsychologySocial psychologySelf-determination theoryCompetence (human resources)Job satisfactionPoliticsWork (physics)IndividualismPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Past studies in U.S. work organizations have supported a model derived from self-determination theory in which autonomy-supportive work climates predict satisfaction of the intrinsic needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness, which in turn predict task motivation and psychological adjustment on the job. To test this model cross-culturally, the authors studied employees of state-owned companies in Bulgaria, a country that has traditionally had a central-planning economy, a totalitarian political system, and collectivist values. A sample from a privately owned American corporation was used for comparison purposes. Results using structural equation modeling suggested that the model fit the data from each country, that the constructs were equivalent across countries, and that some paths of the structural model fit equivalently for the two countries but that county moderated the other paths.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1,847
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonality and Social Psychology BulletinSame topicMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsFrench-language works237,207