MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099801405

An Ontology of Structural Equation Models with Application to Computer Self-Efficacy

2012· article· en· W2099801405 on OpenAlexaff
Jöerg Evermann, Mary Tate

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural equation modelingConstruct (python library)Latent variableFormative assessmentComputer sciencePerspective (graphical)OntologyInterpretation (philosophy)Management scienceData scienceEpistemologyArtificial intelligencePsychologyMachine learningMathematics educationEngineeringProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structural equation models are widely used in IS research as they can accommodate both latent and manifest variables. Recent discussion has focused on the relationships between these latent and manifest variables in structural equation models. Despite repeated attempts to clarify the relationships and provide guidelines on their interpretation, there remains much confusion, as evidenced by the ongoing debate about the use of formative measures or formative items. In this paper, we address the topic from a fresh perspective, by establishing a clear separation of theoretical and statistical models, and by introducing the notions of system inputs and outputs. The paper explores the consequences of these principles for the relationships between latent and manifest variables using the computer self-efficacy (CSE) construct as an illustrative example. The novel ideas in modeling allow a fresh perspective on the CSE construct and a resolution of the ongoing debate about the nature of the construct.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207