DIFFERENCES IN THE SATISFACTION AND FRUSTRATION OF BASIC NEEDS BASED ON EMPLOYMENT STATUS

Santrauka

Although research on the benefits or constraints of working while studying began several decades ago, the differences in employment (student/work) groups are still under-researched. This study is based on the presumption that student/work status creates different possibilities for the satisfaction or frustration of the basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. It aims to explore differences in basic needs, satisfaction, and frustration in different employment groups (whether a person is only working, only studying, working and studying, or not working and not studying). It is hypothesized that the four student/work status groups differ regarding the satisfaction and frustration of basic needs. The study sample included 286 participants from the youth age group, according to the World Health Organization’s 2015 updated age classification standards. Respondents were aged 18 to 44 years, with a mean age of 28.7 years (SD = 6.963); 52.1% of respondents (n = 149) were solely employed, 12.9% solely studied (n = 37), 16.8% both worked and studied (n = 48), and 18.2% neither worked nor studied (n = 52); 41.3% of respondents were male (n = 118) and 58.7% were female (n = 168). This study applied a Lithuanian-translated version of The Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction & Frustration Scale (BPNSFS), which assesses the satisfaction and frustration of the needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. This study partially confirmed the hypothesis that the satisfaction and frustration of basic psychological needs differ depending on a person’s employment (student/work) status. This research also demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the frustration of the need for autonomy between the respondents solely studying and solely working, and between those not working and not studying. Data on the satisfaction and frustration of relatedness and competence did not differ significantly between the employment (student/work) status groups. However, due to the limitations implied by the relatively small and non-representative sample size, these findings should be regarded with concern and should be researched further. This study is important as it adds value to the knowledge of factors in students’ quality of life, which are important for public policy related to higher education and employment.