Transmission of Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction Between Parents and Adolescents: The Critical Role of Parental Perceptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although studies have documented the importance of basic psychological need satisfaction in parent–child relationships, a gap remains in understanding how parent and adolescent need satisfaction are associated. Using two longitudinal intergenerational data sets (200 parent–adolescent dyads and 408 mother–adolescent dyads; two waves), we examined whether (a) parents’ need satisfaction predicts adolescents’ need satisfaction (parental needs effect), (b) adolescents’ need satisfaction predicts parents’ need satisfaction (child’s needs effect), and (c) parental perception of adolescent’s need satisfaction predicts adolescents’ need satisfaction (parental perception effect). Findings from cross-lagged path models analogous to actor–partner interdependence models only supported parental perception effects: Parents’ T1 perception of their adolescent’s need satisfaction predicted their adolescent’s T2 self-reported need satisfaction, especially for autonomy and competence needs. Findings highlight the importance of parents’ perceptions, which may benefit the design of new interventions for 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".