Enhancing the Precision of the Self-Compassion Scale Short Form (SCS-SF) with Rasch Methodology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives Precise measurement of self-compassion is essential for informing well-being–related policies. Traditional assessment methods have led to inconsistencies in the factor structure of self-compassion scales. We used Rasch methodology to enhance measurement precision and assess the psychometric properties of the Self-Compassion Scale Short Form (SCS-SF), including its invariance across Ghana, Germany, India, and New Zealand. Method We employed the Partial Credit Rasch model to analyse responses obtained from 1000 individuals randomly selected (i.e. 250 from each country) from a total convenience sample of 1822 recruited from the general populations of Germany, Ghana, India, and New Zealand. Results The initial identification of local dependency among certain items led to a significant misfitting of the SCS-SF to the Rasch model (χ2 (108) = 260.26, p < 0.001). We addressed this issue by merging locally dependent items, using testlets. The solution with three testlets resulted in optimal fit of the SCS-SF to the Rasch model (χ2 (27) = 23.84, p = 0.64), showing evidence of unidimensionality, strong sample targeting (M = 0.20; SD = 0.72), and good reliability (Person Separation Index = 0.71), including invariance across sociodemographic factors. We then developed ordinal-to-interval conversion tables based on the Rasch model’s person estimates. The SCS-SF showed positive correlations with measures of compassion towards others, optimism, and positive affect, alongside negative associations with psychological distress and negative affect. Conclusions The current study supports the reliability, as well as the structural, convergent, and external validity of the SCS-SF. By employing the ordinal-to-interval conversion tables published here, the precision of the measure is significantly enhanced, offering a robust tool for investigating self-compassion across different cultures.
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 | 0.147 | 0.259 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".