MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325057414 · doi:10.1037/a0039109

Examining the psychometric properties of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale–Brief Form in justice-involved samples.

2015· article· en· W2325057414 on OpenAlexaff
Sherecce Fields, John F. Edens, Shannon Toney Smith, Allison Rulseh, M. Brent Donnellan, Mark A. Ruiz, Barbara E. McDermott, Kevin S. Douglas

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Assessment · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBarratt Impulsiveness ScaleImpulsivityPsychologyPsychometricsConfirmatory factor analysisPredictive validityPsychopathologyScale (ratio)Clinical psychologyTest validityIncremental validityConstruct validityStructural equation modelingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Impulsivity is an important component of many forms of psychopathology. Though widely used as an index of this construct, the 30-item Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11 (BIS-11) has demonstrated questionable psychometric properties in several research reports. An 8-item shortened version has recently been proposed, the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-Brief (BIS-Brief) form, which was designed to overcome some of the limitations of the longer scale. In this report, we examine the internal structure and theoretically relevant external correlates of this new short form in large archival samples of individuals involved in the criminal justice system (prison inmates, substance abusers in mandatory treatment, and forensic inpatients). Confirmatory factor analysis of the BIS-Brief indicates adequate fit following a relatively minor modification. Correlations between the BIS-Brief and an array of criterion measures-other self-report scales, interview-based measures, and behavioral outcomes-are consistent with predictions and show relatively little or no decrement in predictive validity when compared with the 30-item BIS-11. Our results suggest that the BIS-Brief is a promising brief measure of impulsivity that evinces good psychometric properties across a range of offender samples.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations28
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological AssessmentSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207