MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158599033 · doi:10.1177/0013164407313368

Factorial Invariance of the Academic Amotivation Inventory (AAI) Across Gender and Grade in a Sample of Canadian High School Students

2008· article· en· W2158599033 on OpenAlexaffabout
Isabelle Green‐Demers, Lisa Legault, Daniel Pelletier, Luc G. Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational and Psychological Measurement · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmotivationPsychologyMeasurement invarianceMetric (unit)Sample (material)Internal consistencyFactorialConstruct validityConfirmatory factor analysisDevelopmental psychologyTest validityPsychometricsSocial psychologyStructural equation modelingStatisticsMathematicsIntrinsic motivation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivation deficits are common in high school and constitute a significant problem for both students and teachers. The Academic Amotivation Inventory (AAI) was developed to measure the multidimensional nature of the academic amotivation construct (Legault, Green-Demers, & Pelletier, 2006). The present project further examined the consistency of the metric properties of AAI scores by testing their factorial structure for invariance across gender and grade (2 [genders] × 5 [grades] = 10 [groups]) in a sample of 3,417 high school students. Factorial invariance of latent means was also examined as a complementary substantive objective. Configural, metric, and scalar invariance were successfully substantiated across all 10 groups. Results revealed well-fitting models for each group. Moreover, constraining factor loadings and intercepts had no meaningful impact on model fit. Findings are discussed in terms of an increased conceptual and psychometric understanding of scholastic motivational problems.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.252
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.129 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations65
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducational and Psychological MeasurementSame topicMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsFrench-language works237,207