MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212294359 · doi:10.1080/15512169.2021.1987259

What Do People Want from Politics? Rediscovering and Repurposing the “Maslow Hierarchy” to Teach Political Needs

2021· article· en· W3212294359 on OpenAlex
Patrice Dutil

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Political Science Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Philosophy and Ethics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaslow's hierarchy of needsHierarchyPoliticsAdaptation (eye)SociologyDemocracyEpistemologyPublic relationsPolitical sciencePsychologySocial psychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a memorable method to introduce new students to the concept of political needs. Using an adaptation of Abraham Maslow’s “Hierarchy of Needs” to one of “Hierarchy of Political Needs” the instructor presents how needs for “physiological survival,” safety, belonging, “recognition,” and “democratic participation” have shaped political motivations as well as state and partisan responses. The article discusses Maslow’s original arguments and the criticisms that have been leveled against them. It also shows how the original hierarchy has been adapted by scholars since the 1950s. It then demonstrates how a theoretical framework on political needs can be created and shows how the concerns about the Maslow Hierarchy can be used to trigger student discussion. The article finally presents how the concepts are presented through lectures, self-reflection activities, and discussion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.337 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it