MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1511107419 · doi:10.1177/070674370104600910

Factorial Structure of the Sensation-Seeking Scale-Form V: Confirmatory Factorial Analyses in Nonclinical and Clinical Samples

2001· article· en· W1511107419 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gwenolé Loas, A. Verrier, Martine F. Flament, Fernando Pérez-Díaz, Maurice Corcos, Olivier Halfon, François Lang, Paul Bizouard, Jean Luc Venisse, J Guelfi, Philippe Jeammet

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAdventure Sports and Sensation Seeking
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensation seekingConfirmatory factor analysisPsychologySensationClinical psychologyPsychometricsFactorial analysisStructural equation modelingSocial psychologyStatisticsPersonalityMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The factor structure of the Sensation-Seeking Scale (SSS)-Form V was studied in 2 large French samples, using confirmatory factorial analyses (CFA) to test the 4-dimensional model of sensation seeking postulated by Zuckerman. METHOD: The study included 769 healthy subjects and 659 patients who met the DSM-IV criteria for substance use disorders or eating disorders and completed the SSS. The correlation matrices for each of the samples were analyzed using CFA. RESULTS: In each sample, we found the 4-factor model to be replicable. CONCLUSION: The multidimensionality of sensation seeking is supported by the results, and the 4-dimensional model of sensation seeking identified by Zuckerman can be explored in French-speaking people.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicAdventure Sports and Sensation SeekingFrench-language works237,207