Need frustration and depressive symptoms in French older people: using a self-determination approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives To provide evidence of the relationship between basic psychological need frustration (BPNF) for autonomy, competence and relatedness, and depressive symptoms in French older people, and to explore the potential moderator effects of place of residence (home vs nursing home) on this relationship.Methods Partial least squares path modeling (PLS-PM) was used. A total of 410 French older people (212 women, 198 men, Mage = 77.13 years, SD = 9.19, age range: 60-98 years) voluntarily participated in the study and completed the measures of BPNF and depressive symptoms. Sociodemographic data were collected.Results Findings showed that for all the participants, competence and relatedness need frustration positively predicted depressive symptoms. More particularly, BPNF for relatedness significantly predicted depressive symptoms for older people living at home (β = .18, p < .05), whereas BPNF for competence significantly predicted depressive symptoms for both participants living at home (β = .25, p < .05) and in nursing homes (β = .34, p < .05). Among participants living at home, results showed that BPNF for competence significantly predicted depressive symptoms (β = .28, p < .05) across married participants, while BPNF for relatedness significantly predicted depressive symptoms (β = .27, p < .05) across participants living alone.Conclusion By focusing on BPNF and its relationship to depressive symptoms, this study suggests the importance of investigating further this concept, and alerts to the long-term consequences of frustration of competence and relatedness needs in older people.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".