MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019602618 · doi:10.1177/0013164404267277

Validity Studies Psychometric Properties of Scores on the French and Korean Versions of the Hexaco Personality Inventory

2004· article· en· W2019602618 on OpenAlex
Kathleen Boies, Tae-Yong Yoo, Annik Ebacher, Kibeom Lee, Michael C. Ashton

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational and Psychological Measurement · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalBrock UniversityUniversity of CalgaryConcordia University
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsPsychologyPersonalityInternal consistencyPsychometricsPersonality Assessment InventoryCalifornia Psychological InventoryPersonality testBig Five personality traitsScale (ratio)Test validitySocial psychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent lexical studies of personality structure suggest that there are six independent major dimensions of personality. TheHEXACOPersonality Inventory (HEXACO-PI), a new questionnaire that measures these six lexically derived personality constructs, was examined in two different cultural contexts using samples of 149 Francophone and 211 Korean respondents. Scores on the scales of the French and Korean versions of the HEXACO-PI were shown to have acceptable psychometric properties, including appropriate score distributions, high internal-consistency reliabilities, and low scale intercorrelations. In addition, the HEXACO-PI variables showed the expected pattern of correlations with markers of the Big Five and of lexical Honesty-Humility.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.311
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.473
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.082 · 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