MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468793640 · doi:10.7202/1036329ar

Application of Structural Equation Modeling to the Social Sciences: A Brief Guide for Researchers

2016· article· en· W2468793640 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vaithehy Shanmugam, John E. Marsh

Bibliographic record

VenueMesure et évaluation en éducation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural equation modelingLatent variablePsychologyPopulationUnderpinningCognitive psychologyManagement scienceComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSociologyEngineeringMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emanating from a family of statistical techniques used for the analysis of multivariate data to measure latent variables and their interrelationships, structural equation modeling (SEM) is briefly introduced. The basic tenets of SEM, the principles of model creation, identification, estimation and evaluation are outlined and a four-step procedure for applying SEM to test an evidence-based model of eating disorders (transdiagnostic cognitive-behavioural theory; Fairburn, Cooper, & Shafran, 2003) using previously obtained data on eating psychopathology within an athletic population (Shanmugam, Jowett, & Meyer, 2011) is presented and summarized. Central issues and processes underpinning SEM are discussed and it is concluded that SEM offers promise for testing complex, integrated theoretical models and advances of research within the social sciences, with the caveat that it should be restricted to situations wherein there is a pre-existing substantial base of empirical evidence and a strong conceptual understanding of the theory undergirding the research question.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.278
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMesure et évaluation en éducationSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207