MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417008939 · doi:10.2196/77554

Validity and Reliability of the Psychodynamic Organizational Diagnostic Instrument SyMOA: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

2025· article· en· W4417008939 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Testing and Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)PsychometricsQualitative researchValidityPsychodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: A comprehensive understanding of organizations is fundamental for implementing successful change measures. However, to date, there is no empirically testable, operationalized systems-psychodynamic organizational diagnostic method that can capture the deeper, more complex dynamics that are crucial for sustainable transformation. To address this gap, we developed the Systematic Multidimensional Organizational Assessment (SyMOA), a qualitative instrument based on an evidence-based clinical diagnostic framework, the Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnostics III. SyMOA integrates clinical, organizational, and systemic psychodynamic theory and analyzes an organization's challenges based on invisible and unconscious aspects, that is, those lurking beneath the surface. It hypothesizes 3 organizational dimensions: (1) current challenges based on the sociotechnical integration and organizational internal functioning level, (2) internal relationship dynamics, and (3) unconscious organizational conflicts. The SyMOA dimensions are operationalized into a semistructured interview guide and coding protocols for the analysis of the content. By capturing the underlying dynamics, SyMOA aims to provide a deeper understanding of an organization's challenges and establish a solid foundation for targeted interventions. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the validity and intercoder reliability of the SyMOA instrument. Methods: For this purpose, semistructured interviews will be conducted with employees of at least 3 different companies in Germany. The evaluation will be carried out by calculating Krippendorff α to determine intercoder reliability. In addition, construct validity, content validity, and external validity will also be analyzed. Results: Recruitment and training commenced in May 2025. Data collection is planned for the second half of 2025, with analysis to follow thereafter. As this is a study protocol, no results are available yet. At the time of submission, 46 participants have been recruited. Conclusions: This study will give methodological insights into the validity, reliability, feasibility, and acceptability of the SyMOA instrument. The findings are expected to help further instrument refinement and inform the application of systems-psychodynamic approaches in organizational diagnostics.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.365
GPT teacher head0.665
Teacher spread0.300 · 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