Verificação empírica da consistência fatorial do inventário de bem-estar subjetivo munsh em jovens brasileiros
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este estudo se tratou de validação fatorial do Memorial University of Newfoundland Scale of Happiness (MUNSH) para adolescentes brasileiros. Participaram 1864 adolescentes de 12 a 20 anos, residentes no norte de Minas Gerais, Brasil. Foi realizada uma análise fatorial confirmatória visando a avaliar a estrutura fatorial da escala de bem-estar subjetivo para os jovens no contexto brasileiro. Os indicadores psicométricos se revelaram próximos aos exigidos pela literatura sobre modelagem estrutural, garantindo a confirmação do construto avaliado. Os resultados apresentados pelo modelofatorial proposto evidenciaram uma excelente robustez da estrutura tetrafatorial, a qual, organizou-se em quatro fatores: Afeto Positivo, Afeto Negativo, Experiências Negativas e Experiências Positivas. Organização esta, previamente esperada. Considerando a evidência de validade fatorial e consistência interna da escala, sugere o seu emprego no contexto brasileiro para pesquisas com jovens relacionado ao bem-estar subjetivo.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.035 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".