MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predictors of Adolescent Participation in Organized Activities: A Five‐Year Longitudinal Study

2009· article· en· W2059082157 on OpenAlexafffund
Anne‐Sophie Denault, François Poulin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research on Adolescence · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyAdolescent developmentDevelopmental psychologyLongitudinal studyThe artsPositive Youth DevelopmentYouth sportsLatent growth modelingAthletes

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined (a) growth curves of youth participation in sports, performance and fine arts, and youth clubs throughout the high school years and (b) the associations between a series of predictors and the initial participation rates and growth over time. The predictors included individual, friend, and family factors. The moderating effect of youths' gender was also examined. Study participants were 272 youths (55% girls,Mage=12.4 years) and their parents. The predictors were assessed in Grade 6 and were based on reports by youths, parents, teachers, and classmates. Participation in organized activities was assessed annually from Grades 7 to 10. Altogether, the findings revealed that participation in sports, performance and fine arts, and youth clubs remains stable across the high school years. However, interindividual differences were found in the participation growth curves. This variation was predicted by individual, friend, and family factors, mostly with respect to sports activities.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations80
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Research on AdolescenceSame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207