MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412054306 · doi:10.5539/hes.v15n3p189

Development of the Post-Secondary General Academic Motivation Scale (PSGAMS): Initial Evidence of Validity

2025· article· en· W4412054306 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Isabelle Cabot, Rachel Surprenant

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyScale (ratio)Mathematics educationTest validityLikert scaleAcademic achievementPedagogyPsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No accessible French scale measures general motivation in post-secondary education while distinguishing various determinants of motivation to target students’ perception of their learning experience. Given the many measures to support student retention implemented in post-secondary educational establishments, such an assessment instrument seems essential to help track students’ academic motivation. Study 1 reports on the initial development process for such a scale, including a French and an English version, as well as a formulation of items for CEGEP, the first level of post-secondary education in Quebec, and another for university. To explore its structure, it was administered to 1 686 Quebec CEGEP students and studied using the DeVellis and Thorpe model (2021). Study 2 assess its validity with structural equation modeling from 1 662 other CEGEP students. Results show good psychometric qualities, which we discuss in terms of the scale’s prospects.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.268
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207