The roles of basic psychological needs, self-compassion, and self-efficacy in the development of mastery goals among medical students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: Competency-based medical education aims to foster mastery goals in learners. We examined medical students’ mastery approach (beneficial) and mastery avoidance (maladaptive) goals and their associations with students’ basic psychological needs, self-compassion, and self-efficacy.Methods: This was a cross-sectional study employing an online questionnaire. Two hundred medical students in all four years of the medical program completed the questionnaire, containing measures of mastery goals, basic psychological needs (autonomy, competence, relatedness), self-compassion, and self-efficacy. Regression analyses were performed.Results: Of the three basic psychological needs, the need for competence was significant in explaining both types of mastery goals. Self-efficacy and self-compassion were significant in explaining mastery approach and mastery avoidance goals, respectively.Conclusions: Creating learning environments that are supportive of students’ need for competence, raising students’ awareness of the value of learning from mistakes in competency acquisition, and providing opportunities for students to experience self-efficacy may foster beneficial mastery approach goals in medical students.
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 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 | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".