Adaptation and validation of a quarter-of-life crisis questionnaire – The Developmental Crisis Questionnaire (DCQ-12)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this article is to introduce the Polish adaptation of the Developmental Crisis Questionnaire (DCQ-12). In Poland, there is currently no tool for measuring the quarterlife crisis, hindering empirical exploration and cognitive understanding of this phenomenon. The DCQ-12, developed by Petrov and colleagues, serves as an age-independent measure of adult developmental crisis for research and applied purposes. METHODS: This research was conducted online by an external company specializing in research panels. The sample comprised a total of 1,176 subjects. To assess the psychometric properties of the scale, internal structure analyses, including exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, were performed as well as validity assessment. RESULTS: Statistical analyses indicated that the Polish adaptation of the DCQ-12 is a reliable tool for examining the severity of the quarter-life crisis and its components. The obtained results confirm the tool's structure, with psychometric properties in the Polish study comparable to the original data. The Cronbach's α for the entire scale was 0.78 which suggests that the reliability of the questionnaire is satisfactory and acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: The Polish version of the DCQ-12 demonstrated good psychometric properties.Its utilization in therapeutic practice can be particularly beneficial and provide insights into specific aspects of the quarter-life crisis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".