Conceptualizing Meaning-Making through Leisure Experiences
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
There is a gap in knowledge concerning a full understanding of the meanings that people seek to obtain within or from leisure engagements. Understanding these meanings is a foundational knowledge in promoting, strengthening, and changing healthy leisure behavior in society, consequently the need to synthesize what is currently known and offer direction for research is necessary. This paper systematically explains the key meanings that people seek to achieve via leisure, based on a comprehensive literature review. This literature review led to the identification of several overarching leisure-generated meaning groups : (1) connection/belonging, (2) identity, (3) freedom/autonomy, (4) power/control, and (5) competence/mastery. The literature review also suggested that when people achieve these meanings, they frequently experience outcomes of : (a) positive emotions, (b) positive thought-action and (c) human growth and development. Each of these overarching meanings and outcomes is described, and implications for research are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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