A Comparison of the Perceptions of Need Satisfaction and Need Frustration Between Racialized and Non-Racialized Undergraduate Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research has demonstrated that racialized students experience additional stressors during post-secondary education compared to their white counterparts. These barriers can include added institutional barriers, lower representation among faculty, additional stress associated with cultural differences and stigmatization, discrimination, and racism. According to self-determination theory, students who experience an unsupportive or controlling environment are more likely to have lower basic psychological need satisfaction, lower academic motivation, and lower well-being. The current study aimed to examine whether white and racialized students would differ in their perceptions of need satisfaction and need frustration in their learning environment. Participants were undergraduate students (N = 712) from a large Canadian university. A one-way MANCOVA was performed comparing racialized and white students on basic psychological need satisfaction and frustration with gender as a covariate. Results suggested that racialized students perceived lower autonomy satisfaction, lower competence satisfaction, and higher relatedness frustration in their learning environment. These findings present important implications for higher education institutions. Institutions should recognize the diverse needs of their student population and ensure that learning environments are supportive of these needs, as they can have significant detrimental impacts on the overall well-being and academic success of these students.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".