Translation and Validation of the Japanese Version of the Trait and State <scp>Post‐Event</scp> Processing Inventory
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
Abstract In this study, we translated the Trait and State versions of the Post‐Event Processing Inventory (PEPI) into Japanese and examined their psychometric properties. One thousand participants, comprising three subsamples, completed the questionnaires. Confirmatory factor analyses supported a bi‐factor model, comprising one general factor and three theoretically derived subfactors (“Frequency,” “Self‐judgment,” and “Intensity”), for the State and Trait versions of the scale. However, both versions were essentially unidimensional, and scoring based on subfactors lacked support. Additionally, we found preliminary evidence for the test–retest reliability; internal consistency; and concurrent, convergent, divergent, incremental, and predictive validity of both versions. Furthermore, participants with self‐reported diagnoses of social anxiety disorder exhibited higher scores on both the PEPI‐Trait and PEPI‐State than healthy controls. Our findings suggest that the Japanese versions of the PEPI‐Trait and PEPI‐State may become useful alternatives to existing measures of post‐event processing in Japan.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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