MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969733175 · doi:10.1080/09515070.2019.1656054

Development and preliminary validation of the Existential Gratitude Scale (EGS)

2019· article· en· W2969733175 on OpenAlex
Lilian Jans-Beken, Paul T. P. Wong

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCounselling Psychology Quarterly · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGratitudeExistentialismPsychologyScale (ratio)Test (biology)Social psychologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports the development and preliminary validation of a new Existential Gratitude Scale (EGS), designed to measure the tendency to give thanks in difficult times. This study is part of the research agenda of second-wave positive psychology (PP2.0) which emphasizes the positive psychology of suffering. After a pilot study based on a convenient sample, we did a validity study based on 186 participants from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk and regular participants. They completed the revised 13-item EGS, the Short Gratitude, Resentment, and Appreciation Test (SGRAT), the Spiritual Well-Being Scale (SWB) and the Trauma Screening Questionnaire (TSQ). Results supported the factorial validity and our hypothesis that the existential gratitude scale was associated with spiritual well-being while the dispositional gratitude scale is not; this association was shown to be dependent on the presence of symptoms of PTSD. These findings support our proposition that existential gratitude is distinct from the more general dispositional gratitude.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.282 · 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