Application of Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling to Evaluate the Academic Motivation Scale
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
In this research, the authors examined the construct validity of scores of the Academic Motivation Scale using exploratory structural equation modeling. Study 1 and Study 2 involved 1,416 college students and 4,498 high school students, respectively. First, results of both studies indicated that the factor structure tested with exploratory structural equation modeling provides better fit to the data than the one tested with confirmatory factor analysis. Second, the factor structure was gender invariant in the exploratory structural equation modeling framework. Third, the pattern of convergent and divergent correlations among Academic Motivation Scale factors was more in line with theoretical expectations when computed with exploratory structural equation modeling rather than confirmatory factor analysis. Fourth, the configuration of convergent and divergent correlations connecting each Academic Motivation Scale factors to a validity criterion was more in line with theoretical expectations with exploratory structural equation modeling than with confirmatory factor analysis.
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 | 0.002 | 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 it