MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895488504 · doi:10.1177/0734282918801816

Development of the Global Self-Esteem Measure: A Pilot Study

2018· article· en· W2895488504 on OpenAlexafffund
Gordana Rajlic, Jae‐Yung Kwon, Keren Roded, Anita M. Hubley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychoeducational Assessment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsPsychologyOperationalizationExploratory factor analysisMeasure (data warehouse)Self-esteemConstruct validityConstruct (python library)Scale (ratio)Context (archaeology)Reliability (semiconductor)Variance (accounting)Internal consistencyPsychometricsSocial psychologyApplied psychologyDevelopmental psychologyComputer scienceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the current study, we present the development of the Global Self-Esteem (GSE) measure. The six-item GSE fulfills a need for a short unidimensional measure of global self-esteem conceptualized as “overall positive view of self.” The construct is traditionally measured by the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSE); however, several important shortcomings of the scale have been highlighted in the recent research. To improve the operationalization of global self-esteem, the shortcomings of the RSE and of the other measures intended to measure the construct are addressed in the construction of the GSE. Initial psychometric characteristics of the GSE, obtained in a pilot study, are reported. The results of exploratory factor analysis indicated unidimensionality of the measure—a single factor accounted for 78% of the variance in the GSE items, and the magnitude of factor loadings ranged from .81 to .91. Internal consistency reliability was high (ordinal α = .95), and expected relations between the GSE scores and other self-esteem measures were found. The utility of the measure and goals for future research are discussed in the context of limitations of the current study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychoeducational AssessmentSame topicSocial and Intergroup PsychologyFrench-language works237,207