The role of basic psychological need satisfaction as a mediator between friendship quality and life satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Friendship quality plays an essential role for adolescents in achieving optimal life satisfaction. However, previous studies have failed to explain friendship quality and life satisfaction fully. This study examines the role of basic psychological need satisfaction in the relationship between friendship quality and life satisfaction. A total of 450 respondents consisting of three groups of 150 early, middle, and late adolescents participated in this study. Data were collected using quota and convenience sampling methods. Friendship quality, basic psychological need satisfaction, and life satisfaction were measured using the McGill Friendship Questionnaire–Friend's Functions, Sub-scale Satisfaction of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale, and the Indonesian version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. The hypothesis was tested using regression analysis and SOBEL macro for SPSS. The results show that basic psychological need satisfaction acts as a full mediator between friendship quality and life satisfaction (indirect effect = .330, z = 8.383, p .05). In addition, the satisfaction of the need for autonomy, competence, and relatedness can also be a full mediator between friendship quality and life satisfaction. This finding can be an alternative in explaining this relationship between friendship quality and life satisfaction. In addition, the findings can also be used to develop mental health programs for adolescents.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".