Construct Validity of the Dutch, English, French, and Spanish LPFS-BF 2.0: Measurement Invariance Across Language and Gender and Criterion Validity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
, the need for short measures of the level of personality functioning has emerged, both for screening purposes and for assessing change during treatment. The Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form 2.0 (LPFS-BF 2.0) was constructed for this and has received support for its two-factor structure and criterion validity. The authors aimed to provide additional construct validity evidence for the LPFS-BF 2.0 by examining its factor structure and measurement invariance across the Dutch, English, French, and Spanish versions and across gender, and its criterion validity. Results showed that the two-factor model had a good fit to the data in the four linguistic versions. Configural and metric invariance were supported across linguistic versions and gender, while scalar invariance was partially supported. Reporting a mental health disorder and having consulted with a mental health professional were associated with higher LPFS-BF 2.0 scores.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".