Framework Reception Ledger

Tier 1 — gold-standard, 2026 reception strong (15)

These frameworks pass current peer-review consensus, replicate cross-culturally, and have either survived or actively benefited from 2024-2026 academic events.

• Big Five / FFM (BFI-44). Strong (Grade A). March 2026 MASEM (N=45,477) reconfirmed Conscientiousness as primary outcome predictor; Extraversion suppression on deep-task performance newly identified.
• IPIP-50 (Goldberg, 1992). Strong (A). Adopted as ground-truth for LLM personality benchmarking 2025-2026.
• HEXACO-PI-R + H-factor. Strong (A). April 2026 PLOS ONE meta-analysis reconfirmed H-factor superiority for well-being prediction.
• Big Five Aspect Scales (BFAS). Strong (A). 2025 refinement of Intellect vs. Openness in environmental behavior research.
• Need for Cognition. Strong (A). Critical filter for AI misinformation resistance research 2025.
• Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ-10). Strong (A). Survived 2024 regulation-suppression debate; March 2026 PSPB review reconfirmed.
• Bandura General Self-Efficacy (GSE). Strong (A). 2026 standard for agency-based resilience assessment.
• Self-Determination Theory (SDT). Strong (A). Foundational for 2025-2026 remote-work and AI-engagement models; meta-analytic support for the three basic needs.
• Schwartz Portrait Values (PVQ-21). Stable to strong (A-). 2026 validation in political legitimization discourse; circumplex cross-cultural resilience.
• Achievement Goal Theory (AGT 2x2). Stable to strong (A-). March 2026 meta-analysis confirmed predictive validity for academic GPA.
• Cognitive-Experiential Self-Theory / REI. Stable to strong (A-). March 2026 Acta Psychologica review reconfirmed dual-process validity.
• MAIA-2 (Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness). Promoted to Tier 1 (A). 2026 standard for embodied cognition and interoception; clinical and athletic validity.
• Abele Big Two (Agency-Communion). Promoted to Tier 1 (A). Emerged as primary structural model for social perception 2026.
• Social Value Orientation (SVO Slider). Promoted to Tier 1 (A). Mathematical robustness immune to self-report bias; 2026 gold standard for behavioral economics research.
• Bateman & Crant Proactive Personality. Stable to strong (A-). Resilient factor structure across 2024-2026 workplace studies.

Tier 2 — stable, specialized, watch-list (9)

These frameworks remain valid for the constructs they measure but are either bounded to specialized application or are on a watch-list where a single replication failure would move them to Tier 3.

• Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI). Stable (B). 2024 validation of shortened Brief-ZTPI in digital contexts.
• Consideration of Future Consequences (CFC). Stable (B). 2025 discriminant validity check vs. ZTPI reconfirmed unique variance.
• Body Awareness Questionnaire (BAQ). Stable (B). Niche application; stable but lacks MAIA-2 breadth.
• Seligman Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ). Stable (B). Legacy standard; reliable but increasingly seen as old-school.
• Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode (TKI). Stable (B). Dominant in corporate settings; academic value moderate due to forced-choice format.
• Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory (ROCI-II). Stable (B). Academic preference over TKI for SEM; remains conflict-research standard.
• Faith in Intuition (Epstein). Stable (B). Stable sub-construct of dual-process theory; some BFAS- Intellect overlap.
• Brief-COPE. Demoted from Tier 1 to Tier 2 (C). 2025 factor structure failures (range 2-11 factors across cultures); heterogeneous-factor critique.
• Rotter Locus of Control (I-E). Demoted from Tier 1 to Tier 2 (C). 2026 critique of global vs. domain-specific measurement utility; superseded by Health-LOC and Work-LOC variants for specific use.

Tier 3 — weakened, handle with care, explicit caveat (5)

These frameworks have documented 2024-2026 weakening events. They contribute to specific facet measurement at lower weight and are flagged in the instrument’s defense paragraphs. Each is a candidate for replacement by a Tier-1 alternative if one becomes available in the next instrument revision.

• Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Demoted Tier 2 to Tier 3 (C). 2025 East Asian invariance failure; the “externally oriented thinking” subscale fails to load in collectivist cultures.
• Moral Foundations Theory (MFQ-30). Demoted Tier 2 to Tier 3 (C). 2024-2025 Atari et al. formal split of Fairness into Equality + Proportionality; MFQ-2 (six-foundation revision) supersedes MFQ-30; 2025 Ghana study failed to replicate the binding/individualizing distinction.
• Self-Monitoring Scale (Snyder, 1974). Demoted Tier 2 to Tier 3 (C). 2024 Short Self-Monitoring Scale supersedes; the 1974 items are increasingly described as academically obsolete for digital-native populations.
• Kegan Constructive-Developmental Theory. Demoted Tier 2 to Tier 3 (D). Scalability crisis; the SOI (Subject-Object Interview) cannot be automated; Western-centric and gender-bias critiques unresolved.
• Loevinger Ego Development (WUSCT). Demoted Tier 2 to Tier 3 (D). Sentence-completion scoring reliability remains a documented problem; AI-assisted coding still unreliable; 2025 Western-centric stage critique.

Sidecar frameworks (polarity-zero, metadata only)

These two frameworks contribute metadata to the Resonogram but do not load on any of the ten facet means. They are displayed as Blueprint-layer content where appropriate.

• Adult Attachment / ECR-R. Stable, dimensional only (B). 2026 systematic review confirmed the dimensional approach (anxiety + avoidance) supersedes the Bartholomew categorical model. Metryval already uses the dimensional form.
• Short Dark Triad / SD3 (Narcissism G/V split). Stable with G/V split (B). 2026 meta-analysis on workplace bullying; the Grandiose / Vulnerable split is now methodologically mandatory; SD3 vs. HEXACO-H r ≈ -0.70.

Construct overlaps the audit identified

When the framework canon (currently 36 synthesized) contributes to 19 dimensions, some constructs overlap. The audit identified five high-overlap pairs that required explicit resolution. Naming them publicly is part of the costly-signal commitment of this ledger.

• HEXACO-H vs. SD3. r ≈ -0.70; academic literature describes them as “two sides of the same Antagonism continuum.” Resolution: the discriminant validity matrix shows unique variance contribution; SD3 is preserved as a sidecar (metadata only) so it does not double-count the H-axis variance.
• ERQ-Suppression vs. Brief-COPE-Avoidance. Both load onto an “Experiential Avoidance” higher-order factor in some 2024-2025 studies. Resolution: a bifactor model in the discriminant matrix; the Tier-3 demotion of Brief-COPE is reflected in the per-item weighting.
• MAIA-2 vs. BAQ vs. TAS-20. Major overlap zone; MAIA-2 and TAS-20 are negatively correlated. Resolution: MAIA-2 is the primary C-facet anchor; BAQ contributes a distinct sensitivity sub-construct; TAS-20 sits at Tier 3 with the cross-cultural caveat.
• Need for Cognition vs. BFAS Intellect. r > 0.80 in some samples, “functionally identical.” Resolution: BFAS Intellect anchors the P-facet; Need for Cognition contributes a discriminant check, not redundant variance.
• ZTPI vs. CFC. Both temporal. Resolution: ZTPI for past/present orientation, CFC for granular future orientation; both retained with explicit roles.

Active framework count

Currently 36 peer-reviewed psychological frameworks synthesized + 9 additional frameworks cited as methodology precedents (per Framework Reception Ledger, post Round-3 critique item #10 cascade closure). Synthesized breakdown: 21 Tier 1 (gold-standard, 2026 reception strong) + 13 Tier 2 (stable, specialized, watch-list) + 2 sidecar (polarity-zero metadata). All 36 synthesized frameworks are operationalized at item level. Methodology citations (M-01 through M-09; cited as prior art with zero dedicated items, per Colquitt 2019 D-Corr + D-Dist rubric + NLM v2 review): IPIP-50, Seligman ASQ, ROCI-II, Snyder SMS, Kegan Constructive-Developmental Theory, Loevinger Ego Development (WUSCT), BFAS, REI Faith in Intuition, TAS-20. Total cited: 36 active + 2 sidecar + 9 methodology = 47 source frameworks referenced. Two retired (R-02 Abele Big Two + R-03 MFT MFQ-30 instrument; constructs remain scientifically valid) + 1 removed (R-01 Polyvagal Theory, scientifically defunct per Grossman et al. 2026 consensus). Count may shift as the literature evolves; this page is the canonical anchor.

Update protocol

This ledger is updated:

• Every six months, on scheduled audit cadence.
• Within thirty days of any major framework critique event — a multi-expert consensus rejection paper, a factor-structure replication failure, a regulatory body pronouncement.
• At pre-launch of any major instrument version revision.

Update triggers:

• Any framework’s grade dropping below B (current Tier 1) or below C (current Tier 2).
• Any new consensus paper or expert-evaluation report.
• Any registered-report failure to replicate factor structure.
• Any cross-cultural invariance failure paper.
• Any meta-analysis finding effect-size near zero.

When updated, the ledger version increments (v1 → v2 → ...) and the change log below documents what changed.

Change log

• v1 (May 2026). Initial public ledger at v4.3 instrument launch. Tier classifications established from 2026 academic-reception research.