MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143548077 · doi:10.5539/jedp.v4n1p226

Measuring Gender Identity and Religious Identity with Adapted Versions of the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure—Revised

2014· article· en· W2143548077 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brien K. Ashdown, Natalie Homa, Carrie M. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Developmental Psychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)Ethnic groupPsychologyMeasure (data warehouse)Religious identitySocial psychologyCategorizationDevelopmental psychologySociologyReligiosityAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adolescent identity develops across various domains (e.g., ethnicity, gender, religion). Although these domainsshare elements of identity (e.g., belongingness, self-categorization) there is a lack of continuity in the elementsselected when measuring various domains of adolescent identity. This study tested whether an adapted version ofPhinney and Ong’s (2007) Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure—Revised (developed to measure adolescents’ethnic identity) could also measure gender and religious identities. Participants (N = 247, 56% female, Mage =13.33 years) completed adapted versions of the MEIM—R measuring gender identity (which we call theMulti-Identity Measure for Gender) and religious identity (Multi-Identity Measure for Religion). Confirmatoryfactor analysis models for the MIM-Gender and MIM-Religion scales demonstrated modest to good fits. Inaddition, the MIM-Gender and MIM-Religion scales demonstrated preliminary validity. These preliminaryresults suggest the adapted MEIM—R scales have the potential to measure domains of adolescent identitybeyond ethnicity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational and Developmental PsychologySame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207