Development of the Thought Disorder Measure for the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology
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
The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology consortium aims to develop a comprehensive self-report measure to assess psychopathology dimensionally. The current research describes the initial conceptualization, development, and item selection for the thought disorder spectrum and related constructs from other spectra. The thought disorder spectrum is defined primarily by the positive and disorganized traits and symptoms of schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. The Thought Disorder Sub-Workgroup identified and defined 16 relevant constructs and wrote 10 to 15 items per each construct. These items were administered, along with detachment and mania items, to undergraduates and people with serious mental illness. Three hundred and sixty-five items across 25 scales were administered. An exploratory factor analysis of the scale scores suggested a two-factor structure corresponding to positive and negative symptoms for two samples. The mania scales loaded with the positive factor, while the detachment scales loaded with the negative factor. Item-level analyses resulted in 19 preliminary scales, including 215 items that cover the range of thought disorder pathology, and will be carried forward for the next phase of data collection/analysis.
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 | 0.001 | 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