MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197517621 · doi:10.5038/1944-0472.14.3.1934

The Validity of the Assessment and Treatment of Radicalization Scale: A Psychometric Instrument for Measuring Severity of Extremist Muslim Beliefs

2021· article· en· W3197517621 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Strategic Security · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadicalizationScale (ratio)Reliability (semiconductor)PsychologyTerrorismDiversity (politics)Political scienceSocial psychologyGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Assessment and Treatment of Radicalization Scale (ATRS) is designed to quantitatively measure Muslim extremists’ ideologies regarding risk areas that are reported in the literature. Utilizing the scale, in this study, using a convenience sample of 1769 from 10 countries (Australia, Canada, Egypt, India, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Spain, and South Africa) responded to the ATRS. Results supported previous findings about the reliability and validity of the Assessment and Treatment of Radicalization Scale (ATRS, formerly known as Belief Diversity Scale BDS, Loza, 2007) for assessing Muslim extremists. Suggested cut off scores to use for identifying possible extremists are provided.

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 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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.238 · 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