MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142931806 · doi:10.1037/adb0000722

Validity and reliability of the short version of the Problematic Pornography Consumption Scale (PPCS-6-A) in adolescents.

2021· article· en· W3142931806 on OpenAlexafffund
Beáta Bőthe, Marie‐Pier Vaillancourt‐Morel, Jacinthe Dion, Aleksandar Štulhofer, Sophie Bergeron

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology of Addictive Behaviors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMinistère de l'Éducation et de l'Enseignement supérieur
KeywordsPsychologyReliability (semiconductor)Scale (ratio)PornographyClinical psychologyTest validityPsychometricsPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Despite the high prevalence of adolescents' pornography use and increasing societal concerns about it, the examination of problematic pornography use (PPU) among this population is still scarce, potentially due to the lack of well-validated, reliable measures. The aims of the present study were to validate a short, theory-based measure of PPU in a diverse sample of adolescents and identify a potentially at-risk problematic pornography user group. METHOD: = 0.6) who reported lifetime pornography use, collected as part of an ongoing longitudinal study on adolescents' sexual health. To examine the psychometric properties of the short, six-item version of the Problematic Pornography Consumption Scale for adolescents (PPCS-6-A), we conducted confirmatory factor analysis, gender and sexual orientation measurement invariance testing, and assessed theoretically relevant correlates (e.g., masturbation frequency). We conducted latent profile analysis to identify adolescents at risk of PPU. RESULTS: The PPCS-6-A demonstrated strong psychometric properties in terms of factor structure, measurement invariance (i.e., boys vs. girls, and heterosexual vs. sexual minority adolescents), and reliability, and correlated reasonably with the assessed variables. Ten percent of participants were identified as being at-risk of PPU. CONCLUSIONS: The PPCS-6-A can be considered a short, reliable, and valid scale to assess PPU in adolescents, and may distinguish between low-risk and at-risk problematic users. Its use in future studies could lead to a better understanding of the prevalence and characteristics of adolescents' PPU. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

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 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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology of Addictive BehaviorsSame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207