Personality and Lifetime Need Frustration: A Person-Centered Perspective on Interpersonal Problems and Personality Pathology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current research adopted a person-centered approach to examine whether people’s experiences of lifetime need frustration interact with their personality trait profiles to predict their problems and pathology from the perspectives of both the interpersonal circumplex (IPC) and the five-factor model (FFM). Data ( N = 1,026) were analyzed using multilevel modeling. Consistent with prediction, lifetime need frustration predicted participants’ overall levels of interpersonal distress and personality pathology. Furthermore, levels of lifetime need frustration predicted the strength of the relationship between participants’ trait profiles (i.e., IPC and FFM) and their corresponding profiles of interpersonal problems and personality pathology. Findings from the present study demonstrate how between-person differences in lifetime need frustration give rise to the within-person organization of psychological maladjustment and highlight the importance of people’s traits in predicting their unique maladaptations to having their basic psychological needs frustrated.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".