Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37275684›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023

Technology evaluations are associated with psychological need satisfaction across different spheres of experience: an application of the METUX scales.

Ryan Burnell, Dorian Peters, Richard M Ryan, Rafael A Calvo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ryan BurnellLeverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Dorian PetersLeverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Richard M RyanInstitute for Positive Psychology and Education, Australian Catholic University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Rafael A CalvoDyson School of Design Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Digital technologies have the capacity to impact psychological wellbeing in both positive and negative ways. Improving technologies with respect to wellbeing requires nuanced understanding of this impact and reliable ways to measure it. Here, we aim to further this understanding by investigating the relations between psychological needs and people's evaluations of technologies (with respect to satisfaction, usability, and measures of value). Method: Across two studies with 1,521 participants, we improved and validated four scales that were first put forward as part of the METUX model of technology interaction. These scales measure psychological needs in the life, behavior, task, and interface spheres of experience. We applied these scales to four separate technologies (Facebook, TikTok, Blackboard, and Moodle), and examined the relationships between people's need satisfaction and frustration in the four spheres of experience and their overall evaluations of the technologies. Results and discussion: Each of the four scales had good psychometric properties across the four technologies. For each sphere of experience, psychological need satisfaction and frustration were associated with standard measures of usability and user satisfaction, and correlation patterns supported the METUX model and its approach to differentiating spheres of technology experience.

Indexed as

human computer interaction (HCI)motivationSelf-Determination Theorytechnology designwellbeing

Identifiers

PMID37275684
PMCPMC10232989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.