The Psychological Need Satisfaction in Exercise Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to provide initial construct validity evidence for scores derived from the Psychological Need Satisfaction in Exercise (PNSE) scale, a multidimensional instrument designed to measure perceived psychological need satisfaction in line with Deci and Ryanʼs (1985, 2002) self-determination theory (SDT). Participants in two studies ( n 1 = 426; n 2 = 581) completed the PNSE along with proxy measures of need satisfaction. The results of an exploratory factor analysis in Study 1 supported the retention of a 3-factor measurement model underpinning PNSE responses. Confirmatory factor analysis conducted in Study 2 corroborated the tenability of the 3-factor measurement model in males and females and indicated partial support for invariance of PNSE scores across gender. Additionally, the scores on both the PNSE-Competence and PNSE-Relatedness subscales displayed a pattern of convergence with proxy measures. High internal consistency estimates (Cronbach α > 0.90) were observed for all PNSE subscale scores, and participants in both studies reported high levels of need satisfaction in exercise contexts. Overall, the findings suggest that the PNSE displays a number of psychometric characteristics that render the instrument useful for examining psychological need satisfaction in exercise contexts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".