MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1774894670

‘It’s more than a game’: Young women’s experiences with physical activity as a means for resilience throughout adolescence

2014· article· en· W1774894670 on OpenAlexaff
Teresa Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Teaching and Learning · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperordinate goalsPsychologyInterpretative phenomenological analysisPsychological resilienceTheme (computing)Context (archaeology)Personal developmentDevelopmental psychologyMeaning (existential)Face (sociological concept)Social psychologyQualitative researchSociologyPsychotherapistSocial science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This phenomenological study explored how physical activity is experienced as a means for resilience as well as the defining characteristics and meaning of that experience. Four paticipants were interviewed, aged 18 to 21 years; all of which were recieving a university education at the time of the interviews. Physical activity has been connected to various physical. intellectual, psychological, and social benefits duing adolesence. The participants in this study described their journeys to achieving wellness depite growing up with adversities collectively deemed as adverse. Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was the methodology utilized to investigate the data generated through several semi-structured in depth interviews with the participants. The analyzed data formed the overarching theme of self development in the face of adversity , which was evident throughout the three superordinate themes: channeling energy, nurturing relationships, and challenging the self. The participants explained their passages through adolesence amidst adversities to be ones full of ups and downs, but ultimately progress towards their current accomplishments, goals, dreams, and personal growth. The themes are discussed within the context of the current literature and then followed by recommendations for future research, considerations for professionals, and a conclusion including a list of desireable attributes of program initiatives as suggested by the participants.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Teaching and LearningSame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207