MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124330658 · doi:10.1002/per.771

What multi‐method data tell us about construct validity

2010· article· en· W2124330658 on OpenAlexaff
Ulrich Schimmack

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Personality · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPsychometric Methodologies and Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPersonalityConstruct validityConstruct (python library)Structural equation modelingVariance (accounting)Incremental validityEconometricsPsychometricsSocial psychologyStatisticsDevelopmental psychologyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structural equation modelling of multi‐method data has become a popular method to examine construct validity and to control for random and systematic measurement error in personality measures. I review the essential assumptions underlying causal models of multi‐method data and their implications for estimating the validity of personality measures. The main conclusions are that causal models of multi‐method data can be used to obtain quantitative estimates of the amount of valid variance in measures of personality dispositions, but that it is more difficult to determine the validity of personality measures of act frequencies and situation‐specific dispositions. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.240
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.665
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2400.665
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0110.010
Science and technology studies0.0030.014
Scholarly communication0.0170.045
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0070.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.734
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.201 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations43
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of PersonalitySame topicPsychometric Methodologies and TestingFrench-language works237,207