Competence and relatedness show distinct content pathways: competence with capability indicators (self-efficacy, progress, resilience) and relatedness with interpersonal-climate indicators (collegial support, trust, social capital)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? On the C3 contrast, competence was more strongly associated with capability-focused indicators while relatedness was more strongly related to interpersonal-climate indicators. → Marsh 2025
q3 i? On the frustration side, competence frustration related more to internalizing/strain indicators (e.g., cognitive stress) and relatedness frustration to conflictual interpersonal dynamics. → Marsh 2025
Evidence¶
Marsh 2025¶
Marsh, H. W., Ryan, R. M., Dicke, T., Pekrun, R., Guo, J., Bradshaw, E. L., Reeve, J., Lüdtke, O., Clarke, T., & Waterschoot, J. (2025). Basic Psychological Needs Under Constrained Autonomy: A Substantive–Methodological Reflection and Analysis of School Leaders' Needs from a Self-Determination Theory Perspective. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10079-3
q3 · i? · associational · r2
Orthogonal-contrast GLM (C3: competence vs relatedness) over the 64-variable nomological network from the Australian Principal OHS&W Survey. The article reports "competence is more strongly associated with capability-focused indicators" and relatedness with interpersonal-climate indicators.
"C3 exhibits interpretable content distinctions: competence is more strongly associated with capability-focused indicators (e.g., self-efficacy, progress/goal attainment, resilience), whereas relatedness is more strongly related with interpersonal-climate indicators (e.g., support from colleagues, collegial trust, social capital)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Autonomy shows a strong content signal: 53 of 64 outcomes satisfy the a priori autonomy rule, with exceptions for self-efficacy (competence) and collegial support (relatedness) — related
- Perceived AI literacy does not moderate the indirect warmth and competence pathways from GenAI use to trust — related
- Perceived warmth and perceived competence partially mediate the negative association between GenAI use and interpersonal trust — related
- Three-facet MTMM (content × valence × time) supports the SDT 3×2 architecture, with content the stronger separative force and 20 of 21 planned comparisons supported — a broader claim this one bears on
- In EERs, autonomy, competence, and relatedness are each supported by specific design features per self-determination theory — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
competence-relatedness-content-pathways-c3 |
title |
Competence and relatedness show distinct content pathways: competence with capability indicators (self-efficacy, progress, resilience) and relatedness with interpersonal-climate indicators (collegial support, trust, social capital) |
description |
Competence and relatedness show distinct content pathways: competence with capability indicators (self-efficacy, progress, resilience) and relatedness with interpersonal-climate indicators (collegial support, trust, s... |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2025 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-20 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — marsh-2025 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.