MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1772126035 · doi:10.1089/eco.2013.0101

Veterans and the Outward Bound Experience: An Evaluation of Impact and Meaning

2014· article· en· W1772126035 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nevin J. Harper, NorrisJulian, D'astousMarc

Bibliographic record

VenueEcopsychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOutdoor and Experiential Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdventurePsychosocialPsychologyWildernessMeaning (existential)Personal developmentPosttraumatic growthSocial psychologyApplied psychologyClinical psychologyPsychotherapistHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Adventure training has been used for nearly 40 years in North America to support combat veterans in addressing psychological impacts and transition challenges related to their military deployment experiences. A host of social, psychological, and treatment outcomes have been demonstrated utilizing wilderness-based adventure courses for veterans struggling with operational stress injuries and transition issues (Ewert et al., 2010; Hyer et al., 1996; Ragsdale et al., 1996). This paper reports on a mixed-methods evaluation of veterans' courses run by Outward Bound Canada, which assesses learning outcomes and articulates the subjective meaning of course experiences for participating veterans. Results from the Outward Bound Outcomes Instrument show significant increases from pre-course to 6 weeks post-course (N=50) on nine psychosocial constructs. Additionally, themes emerging from semistructured interviews with 12 participants from the sample brought voice to the impact, personal growth and change exp...

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.398 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcopsychologySame topicOutdoor and Experiential EducationFrench-language works237,207