Further Examination of the Psychometric Properties of the Comprehensive Effects of Alcohol Questionnaire
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
Although the expectancies component of the Comprehensive Effects of Alcohol Questionnaire has previously been shown to be factorially valid, the factor structure of its valuations component has not previously been examined. The aims of this paper were: (i) to replicate the factor structure of the expectancies items; (ii) to explore the factor structure of the valuations items; and (iii) to investigate the utility of using the Comprehensive Effects of Alcohol Questionnaire to predict drinking behavior. The questionnaire was administered to 1004 university students along with measures of quantity and frequency of alcohol consumption. Fromme, Stroot, and Kaplan's (1993) factor structure of the expectancies scales was replicated. The factor structures of the negative valuations scales were characterized by 2 rather than 3 factors. Negative expectancies improved upon the prediction of drinking quantity and frequency over-and-above positive expectancies, and valuations further improved prediction over-and-above expectancies. Theoretical and clinical implications are discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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