The peculiarities of mentality repeatability of the modern Russian generations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Among both researchers and clinicians, there is growing interest in self-harm (non-suicidal self-injury). This interest has been accompanied by the development of a number of self-report measures of self-harm. One such reliable and valid measure of self-harm that has been widely used is the Ottawa Self-injury Inventory Version 3.1 (OSI 3.1), which measures both the functions and potential addictive features of self-harm. The OSI 3.1 has been translated into a number of foreign languages, including Russian. However, as yet, the Russian translation of the OSI 3.1 has not been subjected to any form of empirical analysis. The aim of the present study was to examine the factor structure of the Russian translation of the OSI 3.1 and four additional items in the Addictive Features section among a non-clinical sample of young female Russian speakers. METHODS: Data was collected from a non-clinical convenience sample of 200 Russian university students who completed the Russian version of the OSI 3.1 and four additional items in the Addictive Features section. Data was subsequently subjected to exploratory factor analysis, in order to establish the factor structure.FINDINGS: Exploratory factor analysis of the OSI 3.1 and four additional items in the Addictive Features section revealed four functions factors (internal emotion regulation, social influence, external emotion regulation, and sensation seeking) and one addictive features factor. Each of the four functions factors was significantly positively associated with each other. These findings are comparable to those reported previously among other samples with supplementary linguistic versions of the OSI 3.1.DISCUSSION: These findings provide preliminary evidence for the factor structure of the Russian version of the OSI 3.1 and four additional items in the Addictive Features section among a non-clinical sample of university students in Russia, and it is recommended for further use among Russian speakers. Suggestions for further research with the OSI 3.1 and four additional items in the Addictive Features section are provided, including utilising clinical samples, establishing both age and gender norms, and examining the factor structure using confirmatory factor 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".