Bifactor Models of Personality and College Student Performance: A Broad versus Narrow View
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research in the area of personality traits and academic performance has been supported by consistent meta–analytic evidence demonstrating positive relationships between Conscientiousness and grade point average (GPA). However, academic performance is not solely a function of GPA but also a number of other important intellectual, interpersonal and intrapersonal behaviours. This wider criterion space opens up the possibility for many personality factors and their underlying facets to relate to academic performance. Using bifactor latent variable modelling, the current study investigates the six–factor HEXACO model of personality, along with their 24 underlying facets, for predicting students’ academic performance. Model results reveal interpretable and meaningful relationships between both broad factors and narrow personality facets in predicting college student outcomes. Implications for measurement, modelling and prediction are discussed. Copyright © 2014 European Association of Personality Psychology
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it