Psychometric Properties of the Body Checking Questionnaire (BCQ) and of the Body Checking Cognitions Scale (BCCS): A Bifactor-Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling Approach
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research sought to assess the psychometric properties of the French versions of the Body Checking Questionnaire and the Body Checking Cognitions Scale among community samples. A total sample of 922 adolescents and adults was involved in a series of two studies. The results from the first study supported factor validity and reliability of responses obtained on these two measures, and showed that both measures were best represented by a bifactor-exploratory structural equation modeling representation of the data. The results from the second study replicated these conclusions, while also supporting the measurement invariance of the bifactor-exploratory structural equation modeling solution and the equivalence of the correlations among the two measures (i.e., convergent validity) across samples. This second study also supported the criterion-related validity of ratings on both measures with measures of global self-esteem, physical appearance, social physique anxiety, fear of negative appearance evaluation, and disturbed eating attitudes and behaviors. Finally, the results of this last study also supported the measurement invariance and lack of differential item functioning of both measures in relation to sex, age, diagnosis of eating disorders, and body mass index.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it