MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140005502 · doi:10.1177/0146167201276001

Autonomy Support, Intrinsic Motivation, and Perceived Competence: Conceptual and Empirical Linkages

2001· article· en· W2140005502 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCompetence (human resources)Self-determination theoryAutonomyIntrinsic motivationSocial psychologyCognitive evaluation theoryDiathesisNeed for achievementMultilevel modelDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to test three models with regard to the linkages among autonomy support, intrinsic motivation, and perceived competence. The first model is based on Cognitive Evaluation Theory and postulates that teachers’ autonomy support influences changes in intrinsic motivation via changes in perceived academic competence. However, the second and the third model are based on the Diathesis Stress Model of Achievement Processes and posit, respectively, that intrinsic motivation could play a mediating and a moderating role in the relation between teachers’ autonomy support and changes in perceived competence. A total of 215 fifth-grade children participated in a longitudinal study over a 1-year period. Results from regression analyses provided some support for the first model but stronger support for the second and third model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.285 · 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