Breadth and intensity: Salient, separable, and developmentally significant dimensions of structured youth activity involvement
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
In recent years, an impressive volume of evidence has accumulated demonstrating that youth involvement in structured, organized activities (e.g. school sports, community clubs) may facilitate positive youth development. We present a theory-based framework for studying structured activity involvement (SAI) as a context for positive youth development based on two key dimensions: breadth and intensity of involvement. Our main goal is to demonstrate the separability, salience, and developmental significance of these two dimensions. We review three developmental theoretical approaches (identity development, life-span selection-optimization-compensation theory, and affordances) that support our conceptualization of breadth and intensity as salient and significant dimensions of SAI. We also summarize our recent program of research on SAI demonstrating the separability of breadth and intensity dimensions, which shows links between these dimensions and indicators of positive development. Finally, we discuss how the proposed breadth-intensity approach could be used to extend research on the linkage between youth SAI and successful development.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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