MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006499902 · doi:10.1002/jclp.1059

A factor analytic and psychometric examination of pathology of separation–individuation

2001· article· en· W2006499902 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel K. Lapsley, Matthew C. Aalsma, Nicole M. Varshney

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Psychology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySeparation (statistics)ChecklistIndividuationConstruct (python library)Variance (accounting)Clinical psychologyConstruct validityScale (ratio)PsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyCognitive psychologyStatisticsPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two studies are described that attempt to determine if standard-scale-reduction techniques could yield a construct-valid diagnostic screen of pathology of separation-individuation for use in nonclinical university settings. In Study 1 (N = 210), a measure of pathology of separation-individuation (PATHSEP) was reduced successfully to a single, internally consistent factor, accounting for 36% of the variance. In Study 2 (N = 304), these items also coalesced around a single factor, accounting for 35% of the variance. Study 2 also showed that PATHSEP is correlated moderately and positively with indices of insecure attachment, with the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale, and with indices of psychiatric symptomatology (Hopkins Symptom Checklist). PATHSEP also was associated with a poorer profile of adjustment to college. Males reported more pathology of separation-individuation than did females. Evidence supports the construct validity of a shortened version of PATHSEP. Directions for future research are noted.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.590
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations26
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical PsychologySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207