Adaptación y validación del Cuestionario Breve de Confianza Situacional en universitarios mexicanos que consumen alcohol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: self-efficacy for the control of alcohol consumption is a relevant variable in addiction intervention programs. The Brief Situational Confidence Questionnaire (CBCS) was developed for adult problem drinkers in Canada and subsequently included in intervention programs for adults and adolescents in Mexico. Although, the only data reported in our country has been its internal consistency index. Therefore, it was proposed to evaluate whether the questionnaire had similar psychometric characteristics, as previously reported with Canadian adults, with Mexican college students. Objective: obtain the validity and reliability of the CBCS with Mexican students. Method: 1,175 university volunteers, alcohol consumers in the last year and who reported two or more indicators for DSM 5 alcohol use disorder. The evaluation followed the standards for the development and review of instrumental studies. Results: the confirmatory factor analysis yielded a final model of a single dimension of four reagents: testing control over consumption, physical need, conflicts with others and pleasant moments with others, with an internal consistency index of .78. Discussion and conclusions: unlike what was found with adult problem drinkers, in this work a questionnaire composed of a single dimension was obtained, possibly due to the characteristics of the population, with an acceptable level of reliability. The questionnaire can be used in intervention programs or in studies that measure the situational self-efficacy for alcohol consumption in Mexican university students.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".