MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6906314938 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/7egpc

Psychological health at work during the doctorate Scale Adaptation and Validation

2021· article· en· W6906314938 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDoctoral Education Challenges and Solutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOperationalizationScale (ratio)Psychological distressContext (archaeology)Mental healthTest (biology)PsychometricsConstruct validityConstruct (python library)Distress

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a scale validation project in which we test whether the constructs of psychological well-being and psychological distress contextualized to the doctoral research training context share the same dimensional structures as the concepts of psychological well-being and psychological distress at work as operationalized by Gilbert et al. (2011). Also, to examine construct validity, we plan to test if the subscales of Psychological health contextualized to the doctoral research training are correlated with other measures -i.e., Self-efficacy in research Measure (Phillips & Russell, 1994), Research training environment scale (Kahn & Miller, 2000) and Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (Cox et al. 2002).

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.443
GPT teacher head0.572
Teacher spread0.129 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicDoctoral Education Challenges and SolutionsFrench-language works237,207