MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055566887 · doi:10.1080/04419057.2004.9674345

The Perceived Impact of Outdoor Residential Camp Experience on the Spirituality of Youth

2004· article· en· W2055566887 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mary Sweatman, Paul Heintzman

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Leisure Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpiritualityFeelingPsychologySocial psychologyAffect (linguistics)Participant observationSociologyMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceived impact of outdoor residential camp experience on the spirituality of youth. This research focused on 11 participants in month long leadership programs at two YMCA residential camps in Ontario, Canada. After conducting an in-depth interview at the beginning and end of each of the participant's leadership experience, it was found that the participants did feel camp had an affect on their spirituality. The camp setting played a role by providing a natural setting and an opportunity for the participants to get away from their everyday lives in an urban environment. In this environment, experiencing structured and unstructured time alone influenced their spirituality, by providing them with opportunities to reflect on their lives. Social experiences also had an impact on the participants' spirituality by allowing them to develop relationships through formal and informal activities. Finally, the majority of the participants expressed that the camp experience provided them with positive feelings that they associated with their spirituality. This study found that the four themes of the camp setting, alone time, social experiences, and positive feelings played an interrelated role in the participant's camp experience and spirituality.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations46
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Leisure JournalSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207