Construction and validation of a multilingual diagnostic instrument for neuromyths and their origins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents the development of a comprehensive neuromyth identification tool designed to be valid, reliable, and multilingual, including French, English, Turkish, Greek, Kazakh, Arabic, Malay, and Chinese. By incorporating languages from diverse geographic regions, the tool aims to increase the accessibility and relevance of neuromyth research, allowing for more comprehensive and generalizable findings. The primary research question guiding this study was: "What structural properties should a valid and reliable instrument have to effectively identify teachers' primary neuromyth beliefs and the origins of these beliefs?" A mixed-methods approach was used, integrating both quantitative and qualitative methods to ensure the robustness of the instrument. The development process unfolded in four key stages: (1) a thorough literature review to identify existing neuromyths and relevant survey instruments, (2) the design of the initial questionnaire, (3) pilot testing to evaluate and refine the instrument, and (4) language adaptation to ensure cultural and linguistic appropriateness in the target languages. The resulting neuromyth identification tool has been rigorously tested for its structural properties, such as validity and reliability, across different linguistic and cultural contexts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".