Teste Balbinotti-Barbosa de Raciocínio Indutivo (TBBRI-20): propriedades psicométricas para avaliação de jovens atletas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Esta pesquisa teve como objetivo avaliar as propriedadespsicométricas do Teste Balbinotti-Barbosa de RaciocínioIndutivo (TBBRI-20) aplicado a uma amostra de jovensesportistas. Para tanto, estimou-se a estrutura interna doinstrumento, os parâmetros dos itens e dos participantes.Contou-se com a colaboração de 353 praticantes regulares deatividades esportivas, de ambos os sexos (56,6% masculino),e com idades entre 13 a 19 anos (16,38±1,78). A AnáliseParalela e Análise Fatorial Exploratória indicaram a pertinênciada estrutura unifatorial para o TBBRI-20. Com excelentesindicadores de precisão, alfa de Cronbach e ômega de Mcdonaldsuperiores a 0,90. A teoria de resposta ao item, modelo Rasch,demostrou índices dificuldade dos itens que variaram entre-2,07 e 1,38, e índices de ajustes adequados (Infitentre 0,71 e1,13) e (Outfit entre 0,39 e 1,4). Em relação aos participantesobservou-se níveis theta que variavam entre -3,49 e 3,34. Osresultados indicaram que o TBBRI-20 apresentou propriedadespsicométricas adequadas para a avaliação do construtoalvo, cobrindo uma ampla extensão do nível de theta dosparticipantes. Contudo a relação theta/dificuldade, avaliadasatravés do procedimento mapa de itens-pessoas, evidencioupontos a serem desenvolvidos no instrumento.
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 | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".