Investigating the Multidimensionality of Need Fulfillment: A Bifactor Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling Representation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article assesses the multidimensionality of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (BPNSFS) using bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling (bifactor ESEM). The first study relies on a sample of community adults (N = 2,301), and revealed the superiority of a bifactor ESEM representation, supporting the 6-factor structure of BPNSFS ratings, and the presence of a single continuum of need fulfillment relative to 2 distinct dimensions reflecting need satisfaction and frustration. These results were replicated in a second representative sample of the Hungarian adult population (N = 504), as well as across gender, and found no evidence of differential item functioning as a function of age. Relative to males, females presented higher levels of relatedness satisfaction and lower levels of competence satisfaction. Finally, autonomy frustration decreased with age, whereas competence satisfaction and frustration presented opposite curvilinear tendencies, showing that the fulfillment of this need increased sharply for younger participants, a tendency that became less pronounced with age.
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 | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".