MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062591352 · doi:10.1080/14768320601070571

Exercising with others exacerbates the negative effects of mirrored environments on sedentary women's feeling states

2006· article· en· W2062591352 on OpenAlex
Kathleen A. Martin Ginis, Shauna M. Burke, Lise Gauvin

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology and Health · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalWestern UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingPsychologyConsciousnessSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The unique and interactive effects of mirrored exercise environments and the presence of co-exercisers on sedentary women's exercise-induced feeling states (FS) were examined. Participants (n = 92; mean age = 20.2) performed 20 min of moderate intensity exercise in one of four environments: (a) alone/mirrored, (b) not alone/mirrored, (c) alone/unmirrored, or (d) not alone/unmirrored. FS were measured pre-, mid-, and 5 min post-exercise. Self-consciousness, perceived social evaluation and social comparisons were also assessed post-exercise. Multilevel modeling procedures indicated that women in the not alone/mirrored environment experienced smaller increases in post-exercise revitalization than the other conditions (p < 0.05), and were the only condition to experience increased physical exhaustion (p < 0.05). Women in the not alone/mirrored condition also reported greater self-consciousness and more social comparisons than those in alone/mirrored condition (ps < 0.01). Findings are consistent with Objective Self-Awareness Theory, and suggest that mirrored, group exercise environments are not conducive to psychological well-being among women unaccustomed to exercise.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.378
Teacher spread0.347 · 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