Identifying Belief-Based Targets for the Promotion of Leisure-Time Walking
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Walking is the most common type of physical activity (PA) and the likely target of efforts to increase PA. No studies, however, have identified the belief-level correlates for walking using the theory of planned behavior. This study elicits salient beliefs about walking and evaluates beliefs that may be most important for walking-promotion campaigns. A random sample of 55 Canadian adults participated in the elicitation study, and the validation study includes 358 participants who completed measures of demographics, beliefs from the elicitation study, and self-reported walking behavior. Belief-behavior relationships show that almost all behavioral expectancies are correlates of intention and behavior, but normative and control expectancies are more select correlates. But when belief-behavior relations are evaluated by participants meeting PA recommendations, only beliefs about feeling good, appearance, stress relief, and time are significant. Public health efforts to promote walking should focus on making time for regular walking and the affective advantages that walking can provide.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it