MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023450525 · doi:10.1002/oti.270

A study of the essence of play experience to children living in Zanzibar, Tanzania

2009· article· en· W2023450525 on OpenAlexaff
Stephany Berinstein, Lílian Magalhães

Bibliographic record

VenueOccupational Therapy International · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTanzaniaPhotovoicePovertyMeaning (existential)Developmental psychologyPsychologyValue (mathematics)CreativityGirlMedicineSocial psychologySociologyPsychotherapistSocioeconomicsPolitical scienceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to gain an understanding of the essence of play experience to children in Zanzibar, Tanzania. A phenomenological approach using the photovoice method was adopted. The study was carried out over 4 weeks, with 12 boys and 4 girls. Four key themes emerged from the analysis of 116 photographs: creative play, physical play/games, football and equipment play. The findings suggest that play experience in Zanzibar has aspects of creativity and resourcefulness, and influences from tradition, culture and poverty. Furthermore, that opportunity for play may differ for children in Tanzania, compared with children in Western countries. Unequal boy and girl participants, and the lack of representation of children with a disability were some limitations of this study. The occupational therapy profession may want to further investigate the opportunities for play for children living in developing countries. Additionally, it may be valuable to look at different aspects of play, such as its meaning to children from different cultures and its potential restorative value for children who have experienced traumatic events.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Citations48
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOccupational Therapy InternationalSame topicChildren's Rights and ParticipationFrench-language works237,207