Brief Form of the Interpersonal Competence Questionnaire (ICQ-15)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The Interpersonal Competence Questionnaire (ICQ) developed by Buhrmester and colleagues ( 1988 ) in the US assesses the multidimensional construct of social competence via five distinct, but related subscales. Two versions comprising 40 and 30 items, respectively, are available in German. The purpose of the current study is to develop and validate a brief version of the ICQ among a large adult sample that is representative of the German general population. Data were collected from 2,009 participants. Three confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were conducted in order to develop and validate the ICQ-15. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were computed for the ICQ-15. An initial CFA with the ICQ-30 formed the basis for the selection of the items to be included in the ICQ-15. Two subsequent CFA’s with the ICQ-15 revealed an excellent fit of the hypothesized five-factor model to the observed data. Internal consistency coefficients were in the adequate range. This preliminary evaluation shows that the ICQ-15 is a structurally valid measure of interpersonal competence recommended for research contexts with limited assessment time and for psychotherapy progress tracking in clinical settings.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it