MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2614325462 · doi:10.1590/1413-82712017220111

The Experiences in Close Relationships - Relationship Structures Questionnaire (ECR-RS): validity evidence and reliability

2017· article· en· W2614325462 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsico-USF · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRasch modelPsychologyCategorical variableReliability (semiconductor)Internal consistencyExploratory factor analysisScale (ratio)Developmental psychologyPsychometricsClinical psychologyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The ECR-RS assesses attachment in close relationships: father, mother, romantic partners and friends. Each relationship is assessed by a scale that theoretically comprises two factors: anxious and avoidant attachment. The main goals of this research was to estimate the first evidences of internal structure validity and reliability of the ECR-RS Brazilian version, and describe the item parameters and participants’ characteristics. The sample comprised 251 participants (mean age: 28.21 ± 10.29; 81.95% women). The categorical Exploratory Factor Analysis revealed two-dimensional structure of the scales, as theoretically hypothesized, with desirable internal consistency indexes. The Rasch-Masters Partial Credit Mode indicated that the instrument items have a level of difficulty close to the mean and suitable adjustments indexes (Infit/Outfit), and summarized description of participants’ theta levels. The results suggest that the instrument is an appropriate measure of attachment in adults.

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.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.316 · 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