MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317042011 · doi:10.47626/2237-6089-2022-0573

Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Iowa-Netherlands Comparison Orientation Measure for the Brazilian context

2023· article· en· W4317042011 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPsychometric Methodologies and Testing
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsCronbach's alphaPsychologyExploratory factor analysisReliability (semiconductor)Context (archaeology)PopulationAffect (linguistics)Structural equation modelingScale (ratio)Adaptation (eye)ValidityMeasure (data warehouse)PsychometricsContent validityStatisticsSocial psychologyApplied psychologyClinical psychologyMathematicsComputer scienceMedicineGeographyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The Iowa-Netherlands Comparison Orientation Measure (INCOM) was developed to measure individual differences in social comparison orientation and has been widely used in research and various different settings. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to adapt the online version of the INCOM and to evaluate its psychometric parameters when applied to a Brazilian population of university students. METHODS: The procedures were divided into two steps: step 1 - cross-cultural adaptation and analysis of content validity, and step 2 - assessment of psychometric characteristics. Step 1 comprised the processes of translation, evaluation by an expert committee, evaluation by the target population, and back-translation. For step 2, 1,065 university students were recruited and then factor analysis, analysis of reliability, and analysis of validity based on external measures were performed. RESULTS: The adaptation process yielded satisfactory results, including good indicators of content validity. Exploratory factor analysis revealed a two-dimensional structure and adequate factor loadings, except for item 11, which was excluded from the final version. Additionally, the final version of the scale had adequate fit indices (χ2 = 148.45, degrees of freedom [df] = 26; p < 0.001; root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.06; comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.99; and Tucker-Lewis index [TLI] = 0.98). Evidence of reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.83) was observed and there were positive correlations with negative affect (r = 0.36) and negative correlations with positive affect and self-esteem (r = -0.15; r = -0.41, respectively). CONCLUSION: The Brazilian version of the INCOM presents satisfactory psychometric parameters and can thus be used to measure social comparison orientation.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.411
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.069 · 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