MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038579330 · doi:10.1097/jes.0b013e3181d49612

Protection Motivation Theory

2010· review· en· W2038579330 on OpenAlexafffund
Ronald C. Plotnikoff, Linda Trinh

Bibliographic record

VenueExercise and Sport Sciences Reviews · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychologyCoping (psychology)Domain (mathematical analysis)PopulationCognitive psychologySocial psychologyCoping behaviorSelf-determination theoryApplied psychologyPsychotherapistMedicinePolitical scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief This article reviews the published studies in the physical activity domain, which include novel hypothesis from our laboratory, that have tested Rogers' Protection Motivation Theory. Across the various population groups, the theory's coping appraisal is generally supported; however, there is limited support for the theory's threat components. Implications of these findings are discussed from both theoretical and practical perspectives. This paper presents our lab's novel hypotheses in the Protection Motivation Theory in the physical activity domain and reviews the 14 studies, which have tested the domain.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations124
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExercise and Sport Sciences ReviewsSame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207