MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604531625 · doi:10.24879/201600100020062

Verificação empírica da consistência fatorial do inventário de bem-estar subjetivo munsh em jovens brasileiros

2016· article· pt· W2604531625 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria de Fátima de Matos Maia, José Vasconcelos-Raposo, Nilton Soares Formiga, Thatiana Maia Tolentino, Gislane Ferreira de Melo

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Psicologia em Pesquisa · 2016
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.007

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.285 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Psicologia em PesquisaSame topicPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207