MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406692295 · doi:10.20858/tp.2019.14.1.13

CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS FOR TESTING THE VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF AN INTERNAL CAPABILITY AND LOGISTICS OUTSOURCING MEASUREMENT SCALE

2019· article· en· W4406692295 on OpenAlexaff
Omer Abdalla SIDDIG, Abdel Hafiez Ali Hasaballah, Ahmad Adnan Al-Tit, Bader Almohaimmeed

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOutsourcing and Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutsourcingConfirmatory factor analysisReliability (semiconductor)Scale (ratio)Reliability engineeringValidityComputer scienceBusinessStatisticsEngineeringMathematicsStructural equation modelingPsychometricsMarketingGeographyMachine learningCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to develop and validate a measurement scale for internal capability and logistics outsourcing. Regarding the goal of this study, data were obtained from 180 respondents who are currently performing logistics outsourcing in different fields in Sudan (oil industry, telecommunications, logistics services and manufacturing). Depending on the questioner technique, a total of 36 items and 5 subscales were generated based on the literature. The study uses a five-point Likert-style response scale (ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree). The scale was subjected to confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for determining the validity and reliability of the study dataset. Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient (α) of the scale was reported to be 0.88. Findings of the study indicate that the resulting internal capability and logistics outsourcing measurement scale can serve as a valuable tool for measuring the logistics outsourcing drivers, namely time-related drivers, cost-related drivers, flexibility-related drivers, and quality-related drivers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.294
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.161 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicOutsourcing and Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207