Habilitation Psychologique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’objectif de cet article est de valider une mesure francophone de l’habilitation psychologique au travail s’inscrivant dans la conception quadridimensionnelle de Spreitzer (1995 ). Pour ce faire, l’instrument a été administré à trois échantillons de salariés canadiens. Une première étude (N = 120) a été réalisée afin d’explorer la structure factorielle de l’instrument francophone et de vérifier ses propriétés psychométriques. Puis, une seconde étude a été réalisée auprès de deux échantillons distincts (N = 222, N = 248) afin de confirmer la structure factorielle de l’instrument et de vérifier sa validité nomologique. Les résultats indiquent que l’instrument francophone présente une structure factorielle conforme à la conceptualisation de Spreitzer (1995 ) et que la mesure est liée à des antécédents et des conséquences faisant partie de son réseau nomologique.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".