Life satisfaction of Paralympians: The role of needs satisfaction and passion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study examined the possible role of basic psychological needs and passion in Paralympians’ life satisfaction. A mediational model was tested where autonomy, competence and relatedness were hypothesized to be linked to athlete life satisfaction via harmonious and obsessive passion. The sample comprised 91 Portuguese Paralympians aged between 18 and 59 years ( M = 31.01; SD = 3.78). Athletes completed self-reports of needs satisfaction in their sport, passion towards their sport, and general life satisfaction. Perceptions of competence and relatedness were associated with harmonious passion (β = .37, p > .01; β = .21, p > .05, respectively), while perceptions of autonomy were associated with obsessive passion (β = .39, p > .05). Additionally, harmonious passion, but not obsessive passion, was associated with life satisfaction (β = .40, p > .01), and only the indirect effect from competence to life satisfaction, via harmonious passion, was significant. These results suggest that feeling autonomous may not necessarily translate into more harmonious passionate engagement but is associated with higher levels of obsessive passion. In contrast, competence and relatedness appear to play an important role in the life of athletes who experience a more harmonious passion towards their sport practice. Perceptions of mastery and competence, as well as sport-related social connections could be important to consider improving the lives of athletes with Paralympic experience.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".