Psychometric Properties of the French and English Versions of the Vancouver Obsessional‐Compulsive Inventory and the Symmetry Ordering and Arranging Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Vancouver Obsessional-Compulsive Inventory (VOCI) and the Symmetry Ordering and Arranging Questionnaire (SOAQ) are self-report measures that assess a wide variety of symptoms and features of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) including checking, contamination, obsessions, hoarding, "just right", indecisiveness, and symmetry, ordering and arranging obsessions and compulsions. The original English versions of the VOCI and SOAQ have been shown to demonstrate excellent psychometric properties. The present study examined the reliability and validity of French translations of these measures in a non-clinical sample, and also involved the collection of supplementary psychometric information about the English versions of the scales from a new sample. Volunteer undergraduate students completed questionnaire packages including the VOCI and SOAQ, as well as measures of obsessive-compulsive, phobic and depressive symptomatology in their native language of either French or English. Results indicate that the French versions of the VOCI and SOAQ demonstrate similar and excellent psychometric properties to the English versions and that these measures are highly valid and reliable assessment tools for use in clinical and research applications in both languages.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".