Validation de L’échelle Unidimensionnelle D’Estime de Soi de Ducher (ESD): Validation of Ducher's Unidimensional Self-Esteem Scale (SES)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although self-esteem is a relatively new concept, first developed in the field of social psychology, it has gained increasing importance in psychiatry, especially as a diagnostic criterion. However, it is poorly evaluated in clinical practice. The lack of an instrument allowing an easy global assessment may be the reason for this. It is therefore a question of validating a short, one-dimensional self-esteem scale in French, possibly allowing an evolutionary follow-up by self-correction. METHODS: The study involved 106 patients with various psychiatric disorders, except psychotic disorder, stabilized or of varying severity. The creation of the original tool included 10 items. It was submitted to the selection of items followed by an exploratory factor analysis. The correlation between the items and the measurement of consistency and convergent validity were then performed. RESULT: The evaluation of acceptability and distribution of results led to the selection of 6 items. Exploratory factor analysis revealed a unique dimension and good reliability (Tucker-Lewis Index = 0.89). No item displays correlations with a total score of less than 0.50 and the concept of construct is consistent. There is also a good internal consistency which confirms that the 6-item ESD version is optimal. CONCLUSION: This new, validated scale will allow therapists to more accurately investigate the notion of self-esteem in a clinical or research setting.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".