Examining the Basic Psychological Needs of Library and Information Science Doctoral Students
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine how the basic psychological needs of self-determination theory are reflected in doctoral students’ motivation to earn the PhD. Background: As isolating as the doctoral experience seems, it is one that occurs in a social-cultural environment that can either support or hinder the student. This research highlights the motivational influences of library and information science doctoral students regarding experiences of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Methodology: Qualitative data were collected from seven (7) enrolled doctoral students at library and information science programs in the United States and Canada. Transcripts from semi-structured interviews and students’ personal admission statements were subjected to deductive content analysis for emphasis on three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Contribution: Findings illustrate the role faculty play in student motivation and satisfaction with the doctoral experience. There are implications for faculty, mentors, and advisors working with current and former graduate students who may be considering a PhD. The findings have implications for doctoral recruitment, advising, and student services of interest to faculty and administrators across disciplines. It also shows the applicability of self-determination theory in the examination of the doctoral student experience and overall motivation. Findings: Deductive analysis based on self-determination theory (SDT) demonstrates factors related to self-determination theory’s basic psychological needs – autonomy, competence, and relatedness – as relevant to participants’ motivation to pursue a doctoral degree and to the examination of doctoral student initial motivation. Doctoral students are motivated by multiple factors including their interactions with and encouragement received from current and former faculty. Students report experiences related to autonomy, competence, and relatedness that energized them to pursue a doctoral degree and that have positively influenced their doctoral experience thus far. Recommendations for Practitioners: Faculty and program administrators may use this data to inform their understanding of the expectations of today’s doctoral students and motivational drivers of prospective students and to tailor support services accordingly. Recommendation for Researchers: This is a preliminary investigation of doctoral student motivation in relation to the basic psychological needs. More research is needed on a larger sample of students to more fully understand the influence of autonomy, competence, and relatedness on doctoral student initial and ongoing motivation. Impact on Society: This research is an important step in bridging faculty and student perceptions of what is important to their initial and ongoing enrollment in a doctoral program. By improving students’ experiences of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, it may be possible to improve the overall doctoral experience leading to completion of the PhD. Future Research: Future research will expand to include doctoral students farther along in their doctoral programs, the administration of the Basic Psychological Needs Scale, and may examine faculty perceptions of the three basic psychological needs.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it