MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Principles, Standards, and Guidelines that Impact Test Development and Use and Sources of Information

2012· book-chapter· en· W2623026208 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas Oakland

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Abilities and Testing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)Association (psychology)CommissionPsychological scienceProfessional associationPsychologyPolitical sciencePsychological testingAdaptation (eye)Applied psychologyPublic relationsEngineering ethicsSocial psychologyClinical psychologyEngineeringLawPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Test development and use may constitute psychology's most important technical contribution to the behavior sciences. Tests are found universally, albeit distributed unevenly. Despite their somewhat widespread use, ethics codes from only 20 psychological associations address issues associated with test development and use. However, services from professionals engaged in test development and use are likely to find general guidance from policies promulgated by international (i.e., World Health Organization, International Union of Psychological Sciences, and the International Association of Applied Psychology) and regional professional associations. Guidelines from the International Test Commission specifically address issues important to test adaptation and use. Guidelines from the American Psychological Association, British Psychological Society, and Canadian Psychological Association also are featured. Prominent sources that provide information on tests are identified.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicCognitive Abilities and TestingFrench-language works237,207