TY - JOUR
T1 - Fundamental freedoms and optimal functioning
T2 - Nussbaum’s capabilities predict wellness in a dual process model via basic psychological need satisfaction and frustration
AU - Bradshaw, Emma L.
AU - Ferber, Kelly A.
AU - DeHaan, Cody R.
AU - Ryan, Richard M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2025.
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - Across three studies we explore the interface between self-determination theory (SDT) and Nussbaum’s philosophy of capabilities by exploring how societal capabilities relate to wellness via basic psychological needs. In Study 1 (N = 778, from Australia, India, Philippines, South Africa, and the United States) and Study 2 (N = 495 Americans), we examined Lorgelly et al.’s (Social Science & Medicine 142:68–81, 2015) measure of capabilities, identifying a four-factor solution yielding variables for freedom of expression, freedom from discrimination, well-being, and home safety. We assessed links between freedom of expression and freedom from discrimination and wellness outcomes via basic psychological needs in Study 1, Study 2, and Study 3 (N = 203, Indigenous Australians, 500 non-indigenous Australians). Aligned with SDT’s dual process model, need satisfaction appears to account for the paths to well-being, and need frustration may account for paths to ill-being. This work steers SDT in a new direction by extending the dual process model beyond interpersonal contexts and more fully integrating philosophical perspectives on capabilities to shed light upon how macro-level societal affordances relate to wellness through basic psychological needs.
AB - Across three studies we explore the interface between self-determination theory (SDT) and Nussbaum’s philosophy of capabilities by exploring how societal capabilities relate to wellness via basic psychological needs. In Study 1 (N = 778, from Australia, India, Philippines, South Africa, and the United States) and Study 2 (N = 495 Americans), we examined Lorgelly et al.’s (Social Science & Medicine 142:68–81, 2015) measure of capabilities, identifying a four-factor solution yielding variables for freedom of expression, freedom from discrimination, well-being, and home safety. We assessed links between freedom of expression and freedom from discrimination and wellness outcomes via basic psychological needs in Study 1, Study 2, and Study 3 (N = 203, Indigenous Australians, 500 non-indigenous Australians). Aligned with SDT’s dual process model, need satisfaction appears to account for the paths to well-being, and need frustration may account for paths to ill-being. This work steers SDT in a new direction by extending the dual process model beyond interpersonal contexts and more fully integrating philosophical perspectives on capabilities to shed light upon how macro-level societal affordances relate to wellness through basic psychological needs.
KW - Economic conditions
KW - Pervasive environments
KW - Positive psychology
KW - Primary goods
KW - Well-being
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105011349857
U2 - 10.1007/s11031-025-10152-y
DO - 10.1007/s11031-025-10152-y
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:105011349857
SN - 0146-7239
JO - Motivation and Emotion
JF - Motivation and Emotion
ER -