Measuring self-control across gender, age, language, and clinical status: A validation study of the Italian version of the Brief Self- Control Scale (BSCS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aims to develop and validate an Italian version of the Brief Self-Control Scale (BSCS). A large sample of Italian-speaking participants (N = 1139) completed the BSCS and measures of personality and individual dispositions. A clinical sample (N = 217) was administered the Italian version and an English-speaking sample (N = 274) completed the original version to test measurement invariance. Using confirmatory factor analysis, the best fit was observed for a shortened two-factor model (i.e., impulse control and self-discipline). Metric invariance across languages and partial strong invariance across genders, ages, and clinical status were demonstrated. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability for the total scale were adequate, and validity was established based on its correlations with related constructs and confirming that males and young individuals are more likely to have lower self-control. Results support the use of the shortened BSCS version to assess self-control in Italian-speaking individuals.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".