Group Environment Questionnaire and its Applicability in an Exercise Setting
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
The Group Environment Questionnaire (GEQ) has recently been modified by Spink and Carron to assess group cohesion in exercise settings. However, as they point out, fitness classes possess a minimum number of criteria necessary to satisfy the requirements of a group. Therefore, applying an instrument developed to measure cohesion in sport teams to exercise classes may produce potential threats to the validity of the modified scale. Hence, the present study administered the modified GEQ to 307 exercise participants in the 3rd week of classes to test the factorial validity of the scale. The overall model was deemed an inadequate fit, and a modified version was suggested that retained the original four-factor structure. A second study administered the modified GEQ to 43 exercise participants at weeks 3 and 7 of typical aerobics classes and found that group cohesion did not develop over time and was not related to exercise adherence.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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