“It's Who I Am … Really!’ The Importance of Integrated Regulation in Exercise Contexts1
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: ObservationalConsensus signal: Observational
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.269
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.999
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.329 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
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
Abstract
The purpose of this series of studies was to evaluate a measure of integrated regulation specific to exercise contexts in line with Self‐Determination Theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2002). To address this purpose, three studies were conducted to test select psychometric and theoretical properties of four integrated regulation items created for use within the Behavioural Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire (BREQ). Confirmatory factor analyses conducted in Studies 1 and 2 supported the inclusion of integrated regulation within the expanded BREQ measurement model. Simultaneous multiple regression analyses (SMRAs) conducted in Study 2 indicated that greater need satisfaction promoted endorsement of autonomous exercise motives, including integrated regulation. Finally, SMRA conducted in Study 3 revealed that integrated regulation contributed to the prediction of exercise behavior and physical self‐worth. Collectively, the results of this investigation suggest that the new integrated regulation items can be used in conjunction with the BREQ without compromising validity, and support Deci and Ryan's (1985, 2002) assertions regarding the importance of autonomous extrinsic motives, including integrated regulation in exercise domains.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research
- Topic
- Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
- Field
- Psychology
- Canadian institutions
- University of AlbertaBrock University
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- Deci-PsychologyConfirmatory factor analysisInclusion (mineral)Test (biology)Clinical psychologySocial psychologyStructural equation modelingComputer science
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes