An evaluation of the psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties scale in Turkey: Implications for other <scp>non‐WEIRD</scp> countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is a very widely used scale in which parents, teachers or the child rate various aspects of the child's well‐being. It is widely used in the Western world and is translated into 80+ languages. It is also used in countries that do not classify as WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic). However, unlike WEIRD countries, some studies indicate that the psychometric properties of the SDQ when used in non‐WEIRD countries are questionable. Therefore, we gave the SDQ to the mothers and teachers of 310 3‐ to 5‐year‐olds in urban centres of Turkey and examined its psychometric properties. Turkey is not a WEIRD country because it is not Western, although the participants in our study were well educated, living in an industrialized area, rich relative to others in Turkey (although poor relative to Westerners) and democratic. As such, it is not drastically different from WEIRD countries and our question was whether even relatively small deviations from standard WEIRD criteria could result in questionable psychometric properties for the SDQ.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".