Psychological assessment: Four volume set
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This collection brings together the major influential publications in psychological assessment over the last 20-30 years to serve as an important reference resource for individuals and institutions interested in psychological assessment research and application. The editors have carefully selected the inclusions to represent a mix of older classics, still very relevant today, and highly influential up-to-date recent work. The articles include recent influential reviews to introduce an area; historical and classical material; and leading-edge recent work which may challenge accepted practice giving readers a feel for the dynamism of the field.\nThe collection portrays the original sources that have most significantly shaped psychological assessment research in recent years, some critical reviews, as well as including the very best research articles outlining key recent developments, thereby providing an essential set of core readings for the field.\nVolume One: Intelligence Assessment\nVolume Two: Personality Assessment\nVolume Three: Clinical Neuropsychological Assessment\nVolume Four: Clinical and Applied Psychological Assessment
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.130 | 0.087 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".