The Self-Expansiveness Level Form: Examination of its Validity and Relation to the Neo Personality Inventory—Revised
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
This study examined the validity of the Self-expansiveness Level Form of Friedman with particular emphasis on the Transpersonal subscale, a measure of transpersonal self-concept, in terms of its basic psychometric properties and its relation to the NEO Personality Inventory--Revised. Support for the basic psychometric properties of the scale in terms of reliability, factorial validity, and concurrent validity was obtained; however, support was limited for convergent validity as correlations between scores on the Transpersonal subscale and measures of theoretically related constructs were low. Correlational analyses involving the Self-expansiveness Level Form and NEO Personality Inventory--Revised indicated that Transpersonal scores were not appreciably associated with the NEO Personality Inventory--Revised domains. Moreover, factor analysis of NEO Personality Inventory--Revised facets and Self-expansiveness Level Form items generated a solution in which the two measures contributed to separate factors. Discussion of the implications and limitations of the findings is included.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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