MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adolescent Playfulness, Stress Perception, Coping and Well Being

2007· article· en· W1622028340 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Leisure Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyStressorCoping (psychology)PerceptionDevelopmental psychologyPersonalityDispositionSocial psychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The focus of this study was to investigate the relationship between adolescent playfulness, the perception of daily stressors and the coping strategies engaged by adolescents within the context of school and leisure. A mixed method approach was used including semi-structured interviews, scales and survey questionnaires. Two hundred ninety adolescents' ages 12 to 19 participated in the study. Results suggest that playful teens are less prone to experience stress of a personal nature or in relation to their peers. Yet they were more prone to experience stress concerning their future or their parents' future. A number of contextual variations were identified. Playfulness as a personality disposition had significant predictive value pertaining to the adolescents' leisure experience, the perception of daily stressors and overall well being. No significant differences across gender or coping mechanisms (active, internal, and withdrawal) were observed. Contrary to previous assumptions, high playful and low playful teens appear to engage in very similar coping processes for very similar stressors, thus playfulness has a low predictability in terms of adolescent coping. Practical implications of this study are discussed.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.350 · 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