MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The psychosocial inventory of ego strengths: Examination of theory and psychometric properties

2006· article· en· W2053697144 on OpenAlexaff
Carol A. Markstrom, Sheila K. Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Adolescence · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOptimism, Hope, and Well-being
Canadian institutionsBC StudiesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersVirginia Agricultural Experiment Station, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
KeywordsPsychologyPsychosocialErikson's stages of psychosocial developmentId, ego and super-egoPsychometricsCronbach's alphaCoping (psychology)Locus of controlDevelopmental psychologySelf-conceptClinical psychologySocial psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The psychosocial inventory of ego strengths (PIES) was devised as a measure of Erikson's eight ego strengths. The present investigation extended previous research through examination of the validity and reliability of the PIES among 502 high school students. The study also included an appraisal of Erikson's ego strengths as indices of psychosocial well-being. Reliability of the subscales of the PIES was shown through acceptable Cronbach's alphas. As expected, higher scores on ego strengths were positively correlated with psychosocial indictors of identity achievement, self-esteem, locus of control, empathic concern, perspective-taking, and positive forms of coping. Lower scores on ego strengths were related to less desirable psychosocial constructs. Biological sex and age differences also are reported. Based on the findings, the study offers validation of psychosocial theory. As well, the PIES is recommended for use among high school students.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations70
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AdolescenceSame topicOptimism, Hope, and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207