MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294349341 · doi:10.1080/87565641.2022.2105847

Cross-Cultural Performance Validity Testing: Managing False Positives in Examinees with Limited English Proficiency

2022· article· en· W4294349341 on OpenAlexaff
Sami Ali, Iulia Crișan, Christopher A. Abeare, László A. Erdődi

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neuropsychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyFalse positive paradoxLimited English proficiencyMediationArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Base rates of failure (BRFail) on performance validity tests (PVTs) were examined in university students with limited English proficiency (LEP). BRFail was calculated for several free-standing and embedded PVTs. All free-standing PVTs and certain embedded indicators were robust to LEP. However, LEP was associated with unacceptably high BRFail (20–50%) on several embedded PVTs with high levels of verbal mediation (even multivariate models of PVT could not contain BRFail). In conclusion, failing free-standing/dedicated PVTs cannot be attributed to LEP. However, the elevated BRFail on several embedded PVTs in university students suggest an unacceptably high overall risk of false positives associated with LEP.

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)0.000
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.356
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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental NeuropsychologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207