MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938994740 · doi:10.3917/bupsy.560.0083

Étude comparative entre le test de Zulliger et six échelles psychométriques avec un échantillon non clinique d’adultes québécois

2019· article· fr· W2938994740 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin de psychologie · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Testing and Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude évalue les critères de validité et de fidélité du test de Zulliger et propose des normes établies sur un échantillon de 546 étudiants universitaires (H = 20,5% ; F = 79,5%), âgés de 18 à 66 ans ( M = 23,31, ET = 7,31), dans un contexte francophone. À l’aide d’une analyse corrélationnelle, 6 indices du test de Zulliger sont corrélés à 6 mesures psychométriques pour évaluer leur niveau d’association. Cette analyse révèle de faibles coefficients de corrélation (-0,01 < r s < 0,08), suggérant des problèmes de validité de construit. La fidélité interjuges est très satisfaisante (0,90 < ϰ < 0,99). Malgré certaines limites, cette recherche propose des normes francophones, permettant des interprétations pour les études futures.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, 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 score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.012

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.335 · 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