MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Traditional Practices Influence Student' Motivation at School and in School Athletics in the Republic of Benin

2013· article· en· W1634461857 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Edoh Koffi Pierrot

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeaning (existential)AthletesPsychologyPedagogyMedical educationSocial psychologySociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In their daily activities, men are influenced by various factors. These factors, which can be environmental, social and/or cultural, vary according to the types of activities in which these people are engaged. For the Beninese, everything has meaning, which is why, they regularly practice their traditional cultural heritage, as it strengthens their morale during professional activities. Students from this environment can not escape this reality. Therefore, they do not hesitate to call on traditional, cultural practices to manage stress more effectively and increase their motivation. The results of two questionnaires that were administered to 271 non-sports students and to 138 student athletes, revealed that the Beninese traditional cultural practices (prayers, charms and offerings), are making their entry to school and into school athletic associations. The presence of such practices in secondary schools varies between rural and urban students and between animist, Christian and Muslim students. Key words: Traditional practices; Stress; Motivation; School; Sport

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social science→Same topicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports→French-language works237,207→