The Interpersonal Transaction Scales–8 (ITS-8): A Circumplex-Based, Behaviorally Anchored Instrument Based on the CLOIT-R
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using the Checklist of Interpersonal Transactions-Revised (CLOIT-R; Kiesler, 2004) as a basis, a new behaviorally anchored instrument was developed with a graded-response scale, simplified item wording, substantially fewer items, and improved consistency with the interpersonal circumplex. In a community sample (Study 1), the graded response format with simplified items showed improved octant-scale reliabilities, as well as circular structure and convergent validity comparable to the CLOIT-R. Items that performed consistently across community and undergraduate samples (Study 2) were then selected to produce an inventory with half as many items as the CLOIT-R, but with good octant-scale reliabilities and excellent circular structure. Finally, in a therapy context (Study 3), the new inventory showed excellent reliability and validity for ratings of both clients and therapists. This 48-item inventory, the Interpersonal Transaction Scales-8 (ITS-8), may be used for both self- and other-ratings in everyday interactions, as well as for observer ratings of therapeutic interactions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".