Invariance of the MAST across religious groups.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (MAST), a commonly used instrument of alcohol-related problems, was examined to determine whether it assessed the same constructs in individuals from religions with different proscriptions regarding the use of alcohol. METHOD: The MAST was completed by participants in the longitudinal Joint Child Health Project when they were approximately 23 years old. Subjects of this study (N= 747; 505 men) were 465 Hindus, 223 Catholics and 59 Muslims who reported drinking alcohol. Measurement invariance, the determination that the same constructs are being measured across groups, was tested by comparing factor invariance using multigroup structural equation modeling. RESULTS: The Hindu and Catholic groups had similar factor structures to those found in previous Australian, Canadian and U.S. samples. Metric invariance was obtained for the Hindu and Catholic groups, but not for the Muslim group. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest the measurement of MAST factors is invariant across a fairly broad segment of the population in which the MAST might be used. However, the lack of invariance in this sample of Muslims suggests that the MAST is not an appropriate instrument to use among all groups of drinkers. These findings highlight the importance of testing for invariance when using psychological measures to compare heterogeneous samples.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".