MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030789479 · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.15.3.392

Validity of three measures of communication for predicting relationship adjustment and stability among a sample of young couples.

2003· article· en· W2030789479 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Guay, Jean-Marie Boisvert, Mark H. Freeston

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Assessment · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyObservational studyLogistic regressionMultilevel modelSample (material)Stability (learning theory)Developmental psychologyTest (biology)Regression analysisClinical psychologyIncremental validityLinear regressionPsychometricsStatisticsTest validityMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this study was to examine whether data from 3 different measures of communication (i.e., self-report, quasi-observational, and observational) can predict relationship adjustment and stability 1 year later when used conjointly in a sample of 62 young couples. The 3 measures of communication were the Communication Skills Test--Revised (CST-R), the Communication Box (CB), and the Demand/Withdraw Pattern Questionnaire (DWPQ). Through hierarchical multiple regression analyses, results revealed that the CST-R and the DWPQ predict both genders' relationship adjustment 1 year later when used conjointly. Logistic regression analyses revealed that none of the measures of communication significantly predicted relationship stability. In conclusion, the combination of the CST-R and the DWPQ appears to be useful for longitudinally predicting relationship adjustment.

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)0.002
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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological AssessmentSame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207