The Short Version of the Problematic Pornography Consumption Scale (PPCS-6): A Reliable and Valid Measure in General and Treatment-Seeking Populations
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
To date, no short scale existed that could assess problematic pornography use (PPU) having a solid theoretical background and strong psychometric properties. Having such a short scale may be advantageous when scarce resources are available and/or when respondents’ attention spans are limited. The aim of the present investigation was to develop a short scale that can be utilized to screen for PPU. The Problematic Pornography Consumption Scale (PPCS-18) was used as a basis for the development of a short measure of PPU (PPCS-6). A community sample (N1 = 15,051), a sample of pornography site visitors (N2 = 760), and a sample of treatment-seeking individuals (N3 = 266) were recruited to investigate the reliability and validity of the PPCS-6. Also, its association was tested to theoretically-relevant correlates (e.g., hypersexuality, frequency of masturbation), and a cutoff score was determined. The PPCS-6 yielded strong psychometric properties in terms of factor structure, measurement invariance, reliability, correlated reasonably with the assessed variables, and an optimal cutoff was identified that could reliably distinguish between PPU and non-problematic pornography use. PPCS-6 can be considered as a short, reliable, and valid scale to assess PPU in studies when the length of a questionnaire is essential or when a brief screening for PPU is necessary.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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