Study of the psychometric properties of the French version of the Caregiving System Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tandis que la théorie de l’attachement a fait l’objet de décennies de recherche empirique, peu d’études se sont intéressées au système comportemental de caregiving , réciproque à celui de l’attachement. Il s’agit d’un système de motivation innée, qui guide les réponses de l’adulte envers des personnes ayant besoin d’aide. La Caregiving System Scale (CSS) est l’un des rares outils de mesure des stratégies non optimales de caregiving , soit l’hyperactivation et la désactivation. Cette étude vise à étudier les propriétés psychométriques de la version française de la CSS et à en confirmer la structure factorielle. Méthode: Des femmes adultes ( N = 201) ont complété en ligne la CSS en version française, ainsi que des questionnaires pour en vérifier la validité convergente (attachement, empathie, régulation émotionnelle). Une analyse factorielle confirmatoire a reproduit la solution en trois facteurs de Colledani et al. (2021): désactivation, hyperactivation anxieuse, hyperactivation intrusive. La désactivation est corrélée à l’attachement évitant et à une moindre empathie auto-rapportée, et l’hyperactivaton, à l’anxiété d’abandon (attachement), aux difficultés de régulation et à la préoccupation et détresse empathique, suggérant une bonne validité convergente. L’hyperactivation anxieuse, mais pas intrusive, est associée au fait d’être mère et d’exercer une profession d’aide. Cette étude propose une version française de la CSS en 17 items, s’organisant en trois facteurs qui semblent présenter une bonne fidélité et validité. Elle contribue également à la conceptualisation du système de soins en soutenant un modèle récent distinguant deux dimensions de l’hyperactivation. While attachment theory has driven decades of empirical research, few studies have focused on the reciprocal behavioral, caregiving, system, defined as the innate motivational system that guides adult responses to people in distress or in need of help. The Caregiving System Scale (CSS) is one of the few tools for measuring sub-optimal caregiving strategies, i.e. hyperactivation and deactivation. The aim of this study was to study the psychometric properties of the French version of the CSS and confirm its factor structure. Method: Adult women (N = 201) completed the French version of the CSS online, along with questionnaires to test convergent validity (attachment, empathy, emotion regulation). Confirmatory factor analyses replicated Colledani et al.'s (2021) three-factor solution: deactivation, anxious hyperactivation, intrusive hyperactivation. Deactivation correlated with avoidant attachment and lower self-reported empathy, while hyperactivation correlated with abandonment anxiety (attachment), regulation difficulties and empathic concern and distress, suggesting good convergent validity. Anxious, but not intrusive, hyperactivation was associated with being a mother and having a helping profession. This study proposes a 17-item French version of the CSS, organized into three factors that appear to have good fidelity and validity. It also contributes to the conceptualization of the caregiving system by supporting a recent model distinguishing two dimensions of hyperactivation.
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 | 0.010 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".