DAPP-BQ: Factor Structure in French Canadians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Personality traits may be involved in predisposition to a range of clinical and behavioral phenotypes. Given their importance, it is necessary to establish the extent to which different levels of personality traits are applicable to and reproducible across cultures and sexes. In a well-characterized, longitudinal sample of young French Canadians, we examined structural equivalence of broad personality traits using the Diagnostic Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ). We also investigated sex-based patterns of item-endorsement, scale reliabilities, and factor solutions. Our four-factor solution closely resembles the structure reported in the source population of British Columbians, especially in terms of Factors I through III. In contrast to the original study, however, together with compulsivity, rejection rather than passive aggression, defined Factor IV. We, furthermore, observed sex-based differences in item endorsement and both broad and narrow personality trait scores. Subtle differences notwithstanding, our results offer additional evidence for structural stability of broad DAPP-BQ personality traits across sociodemographic and cultural contexts.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".