MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215581770 · doi:10.5539/ijps.v13n4p81

Implications of A Measurement Invariance Study by Age Cohorts for the Life Satisfaction Survey for Apostolic Women Religious (LSSAWR)

2021· article· en· W3215581770 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Debra Moore, Maria Clara Kreis

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Psychological Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLilly EndowmentEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsLife satisfactionPsychologyMeasurement invarianceLife spanSocial psychologyScale (ratio)Developmental psychologyConfirmatory factor analysisStructural equation modelingGerontologyStatisticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A measurement invariance study was performed on the Life Satisfaction Survey for Apostolic Women Religious (LSSAWR) across age cohorts to support its continued use to assess satisfaction with religious life across an individual sister’s life span, and to conduct intergenerational comparisons within and across congregations worldwide. Unfortunately, measurement invariance (MI) is often assumed rather than tested but is important to determine when comparisons are conducted across groups. Establishing MI produces confidence that the differences observed are a result of real differences between groups rather than a result of group membership. In general, the current study provides evidence that the LSSAWR is MI for life satisfaction across the Silent, Baby Boomer, and Generation X cohorts and should be robust to many types of analyses. Therefore, the continued use of the LSSAWR to provide feedback to individual Sisters and congregations of women religious regarding commitment to religious life and overall life satisfaction is supported. The most notable result was two of the five dimensions of the scale were statistically indistinguishable for the Silent generation, but not for the Baby Boomer or Generation X cohorts. This article discusses the importance of measurement invariance studies and implications for instruments used across the life span with items that could be age sensitive.   

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Psychological StudiesSame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207