Examining basic psychological need frustration’s relevance to leisure: A case of Chinese international students during the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although Basic Psychological Need Theory (BPNT) has guided the research on leisure’s impacts on subjective well-being, past studies focused on its positive side: need satisfaction. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether need frustration—where individuals are actively prevented from satisfying their needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness—is relevant to leisure, within the case of Chinese international students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from 444 students were collected through a cross-sectional online survey. A series of hierarchical regressions showed that need frustration—especially competence frustration—in leisure predicted leisure satisfaction, global life satisfaction, anxiety, and depression, above and beyond need satisfaction in leisure. While the results generally support BPNT, we also discuss them in relation to the unique life domain of leisure, Chinese culture, and post-pandemic life. We maintain that need frustration makes BPNT a useful theoretical framework to examine both negative and positive experiences within leisure.
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".