MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384819421 · doi:10.1037/pas0001251

Measurement invariance of the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5) for Nigerian and White American university students.

2023· article· en· W4384819421 on OpenAlexaff
Charles T. Orjiakor, Martin Sellbom, Jared W. Keeley, R. Michael Bagby

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Assessment · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyRacializationPsycINFOMeasurement invarianceSocial psychologyConfirmatory factor analysisWhite (mutation)Facet (psychology)PersonalityEthnic groupDevelopmental psychologyBig Five personality traitsClinical psychologyStructural equation modelingGender studiesRace (biology)StatisticsAnthropologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a previous study, it was reported that the typically replicable factor structure of the Personality Inventory for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (PID-5) was noninvariant across samples of Black American and White American university students. The investigators of that study attributed this noninvariance across these two racial groups to Black American racialization, defined as Black individuals living in a predominantly non-Black society. In the current investigation, we examined further the effects of Black racialization by examining PID-5 factor structure invariance using a sample of nonracialized Black (Nigerian) university students (i.e., Black people living in a primarily Black society) and a sample of White American students. The factor structure of the PID-5 across the samples indicated overall configural invariance, suggesting that the same PID-5 facet traits, for the most part, load on the same factors for the nonracialized Black people and White Americans. This result is consistent with the view that Black racialization likely contributes to PID-5 factor structure noninvariance across White and Black Americans. There were some differences, however, between the Nigerian and White American students with respect to metric invariance and scalar invariance, suggesting the facet-to-factor loadings have different magnitudes of association across groups and that domain scale score elevations in Nigerian and White American students are not comparable; this was particularly prominent for the disinhibition domain. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

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)0.003
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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological AssessmentSame topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207