MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168589075 · doi:10.1177/070674370404901209

Validation de la Version française du Questionnaire de Sociotropie-Autonomie de Beck et collègues

2004· article· fr· W2168589075 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mathilde M. Husky, Olivier Grondin, Philippe Compagnone

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAutonomyPsychometricsSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To validate the French version of the Sociotropy- Autonomy Scale (SAS) developed by Beck and others. The SAS is a self-questionnaire of 60 items divided into 2 dimensions measuring sociotropy and autonomy. METHOD: The SAS was completed by 1028 students, 140 of whom jointly completed Robins' Personal Style Inventory-Revised, and 75 of whom completed the SAS again 3 months later. RESULTS: The principal-axes factor analysis conducted on all 60 items yielded 2 distinct dimensions: sociotropy and autonomy. The factor analysis of each dimension led us to identify 6 subdimensions, just as in the original instrument. CONCLUSION: The French translation features satisfying psychometric and conceptual characteristics and allows these dimensions to be studied in a French sample. Results are discussed with regards to adequacy when compared with the original Beck's version.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations15
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsFrench-language works237,207