MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128004990 · doi:10.1177/0165025413506143

A method to aid in the interpretation of EFA results: An application of Pratt’s measures

2014· article· en· W2128004990 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Development · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive and psychological constructs research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)PsychologyExploratory factor analysisVariance (accounting)Matrix (chemical analysis)Factor (programming language)Simple (philosophy)RowFocus (optics)Factor analysisRow and column spacesCognitive psychologyStatisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePsychometricsMathematicsEpistemologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes a method based on Pratt’s measures and demonstrates its use in exploratory factor analyses. The article discusses the interpretational complexities due to factor correlations and how Pratt’s measures resolve these interpretational problems. Two real data examples demonstrate the calculation of what we call the “D matrix,” of which the elements are Pratt’s measures. Focusing on the rows of the D matrix allows one to compare the importance of the factors to the communality of each observed indicator ( horizontal interpretation); whereas a focus on the columns of the D matrix allows one to compare the contribution of the indicators to the common variance extracted by each factor ( vertical interpretation). The application showed that the method based on Pratt’s measures is a very simple but useful technique for EFA, in particular, for behavioral and developmental constructs, which are often multidimensional and mutually correlated.

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 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)0.003
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.383 · 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