Validation of the brief version of the Susceptibility to Persuasion-II scale and evaluation of measurement invariance across age and gender in the Canadian general population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Measurement tools that can assess personality traits rendering people more susceptible to engagement with and compliance in scams can help identify at-risk populations. The brief, 30-item version of the Susceptibility to Persuasion-II (StP-II-B) scale is a recently developed instrument for assessing 10 personality traits that play a role in scam compliance; however, psychometric evidence supporting the use of this scale is limited. This study aimed to validate the StP-II-B by examining its internal consistency reliability, factor structure, as well as age- and gender-related measurement invariance with a sample of 1287 Canadians aged 16 years and older. Confirmatory factor analysis supported a 10-factor structure identified in previous research. Good internal consistency reliability was obtained for each of the 10 subscales. This 10-factor structure was found to be invariant across age and gender at configural, metric, and scalar levels, suggesting that the StP-II-B was conceptualized in the same way across age and gender and that meaningful comparisons of factor scores could be made. Age and gender differences were found in most factors, with younger individuals and men scoring higher than older individuals and women. This study supports the use of the StP-II-B as a valid and reliable scale for measuring personality traits associated with scam compliance in the Canadian general population and offers insights into age and gender cohorts that may be at higher risk of scam victimization.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".