Testing the measurement invariance of perceived freedom scale by gender
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies that aim to point out structural differences between groups assume that the measurement tool will function similarly, and thus the results of such measurements will have similar psychometric features. Hence, this study aimed to test the measurement invariance (MI) of the construct validity of the Perceived Freedom in Leisure Scale (PFLS). The research sample consisted of 1097 university students (480 women and 617 men). The MI of the PFLS was tested by multigroup confirmatory factor analyses that test the invariance of the covariance structures within the scope of structural equation modeling. The study yielded evidence which indicates that the measurement model defined for the factor structure of the scale provides MI in terms of gender. The fit indexes for formal invariance, which is the first phase of MI, are χ2/df = 1.48; CFI = .97; NFI = .91; and RMSEA = .065. Meanwhile, the study observed that a value regarding metric, scalar, and strong invariances, which pertain to other phases of MI, is within acceptable limits (≤−.01 ∆CFI ≤.01). According to the results, we can deduce that the items on a psychological measurement tool represent the same psychological structure among groups.
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".