Reliability and Validity of a Simple Measure for Assessing the Social Skills of People with Schizophrenia Necessary for Seeking and Securing a Job
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The literature shows that social and vocational impairments are common problems among people with schizophrenia. However, assessment instruments available for measuring social competence of people with schizophrenia in the workplace are limited. This article describes a two-part measure developed and validated based on a model (Tsang & Pearson, 1996) for assessing social skills necessary for seeking and maintaining a job for people with schizophrenia. The measure consists of a 10 item self-administered checklist and a role-play exercise. The self-administered checklist measures clients' perceived competence in handling work-related social situations. The role-play exercise assesses the social skills necessary for job acquisition and maintenance in two simulated situations (participating in a simulated job interview and requesting urgent leave from work). Cronbach alpha coefficients (self-administered checklist: .80 (n = 140); role-play test: .96 (n = 60)) show that both parts had good internal consistency. In addition, correlation coefficients show that the self-administered checklist has acceptable test-retest reliability (.35 to .78), and the role-play exercise has good interrater reliability (.77 to .90). The concurrent validity is also shown to be good for both parts of the measure using the method of contrasted groups. It is suggested that this measure is suitable for use by clinicians, rehabilitation administrators and researchers. Application of the instrument in other countries is discussed. Finally, further research is suggested.
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 | 0.001 | 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".