MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226034177 · doi:10.1093/applin/amac018

Validating the Short-form Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale

2022· article· en· W4226034177 on OpenAlexaff
Elouise Botes, Lindie van der Westhuizen, Jean‐Marc Dewaele, Peter D. MacIntyre, Samuel Greiff

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Linguistics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscriminant validityPsychologyConstruct validityConvergent validityConfirmatory factor analysisScale (ratio)AnxietyStructural equation modelingInternal consistencyPsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyComputer scienceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Foreign language classroom anxiety (FLCA) is a popular construct in applied linguistics research, traditionally measured with the 33-item Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS). However, recent studies have started utilizing the eight-item Short-Form FLCAS (S-FLCAS). There is therefore a need, which this study addressed in five sequential steps, to validate the S-FLCAS in order to ensure the validity and reliability of the scale. A sample of n = 370 foreign language learners was utilized in the validation efforts, which included exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, the establishment of convergent and discriminant validity, and invariance testing. The S-FLCAS was found to have a unidimensional structure with the eight items loading on a single latent variable. Evidence was provided of the internal consistency and the convergent and discriminate validity of the S-FLCAS. In addition, the measure was found to be fully invariant across age, gender, educational levels, and L1 groups. It is, therefore, with some considerable confidence that we can recommend the future use of the S-FLCAS in peer-reviewed research.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations157
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied LinguisticsSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207