MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2549920128 · doi:10.1080/14999013.2016.1235626

Building Consensus on the Characteristics of Developmental Maturity: A Cross-Disciplinary Survey of Psychologists

2016· article· en· W2549920128 on OpenAlexaff
Kathleen Kemp, Naomi E. Goldstein, Heather Zelle, Jodi L. Viljoen, Kirk Heilbrun, David DeMatteo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Forensic Mental Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Abilities and Testing
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaturity (psychological)Construct (python library)PsychologyDisciplineExploratory factor analysisCross disciplinaryCognitionDevelopmental psychologyApplied psychologyData sciencePsychometricsComputer scienceSocial scienceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A critical step toward ensuring a consistent approach to and communication about the construct of developmental maturity is refinement of a general, unified representation of this construct across psychological subspecialties. The current study evaluated the core characteristics of developmental maturity by examining the factor structure of this broad concept. Results of an exploratory factor analysis supported a four-factor solution of developmental maturity: independent functioning, decision making, emotion regulation, and general cognitive processing. Overall, psychologists across subspecialties did not differ significantly in their ratings of items across the four factors. Findings contribute to a cross-disciplinary, comprehensive, and operational definition of developmental maturity.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Forensic Mental HealthSame topicCognitive Abilities and TestingFrench-language works237,207