Factor Structure and Reliability of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales’ (CTS2) 10-Factor Model in a Community-Based Female Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigated the factor structure and reliability of the revised Conflict Tactics Scales' (CTS2) 10-factor model in a community-based female sample (N = 261). The underlying factor structure of the 10-factor model was tested by the confirmatory multiple group factor analysis, which demonstrated complex factor cross-loadings across the subscales for both perpetration and victimization. This confirmatory factor analysis also identified a lack of exclusive factor loadings between minor and severe distinctions of the eight violence measures. Internal consistency of the subscales was generally acceptable (.68-.85 for perpetration and .68-.84 for victimization), except for the Sexual Coercion subscale; the alpha coefficients of the Sexual Coercion Minor subscale were .18 for perpetration and .37 for victimization. Practical implications related to complex factor cross-loadings and internal consistency were 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.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".