Validation of the Polish Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale (SIFS-PL) in community and clinical samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Polish version of the Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale (SIFS-PL). The scale is designed to assess Criterion A of the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) - the four core elements of personality pathology (Identity, Self-direction, Empathy, and Intimacy) from the Level of Personality Functioning (LPF) for personality disorders (PDs). PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE: = 9.6) completed the SIFS-PL. A clinical subsample of 50 patients diagnosed with personality disorders additionally completed the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID5). RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis supported a bifactor four-factor model. All items had significant loadings on both the four specific elements and an overarching general personality pathology factor. The internal consistency ranged from acceptable to good for subscales and excellent for the global scale. In terms of criterion validity, results from the clinical subgroup were consistent with previous research on the SIFS. The SIFS-PL scales effectively discriminated between community sample participants and those suffering from depression, as well as an ambulatory clinical group with personality disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore the robust psychometric properties of the Polish version of the SIFS, rendering it a promising tool for both screening and extensive research on personality disorders within contemporary dimensional models such as the AMPD and ICD-11. Its application in clinical settings can also be advocated. However, general scores and subscale scores might serve distinct purposes, warranting further investigation into their predictive validity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".