MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Acute Exercise Thoughts, Coping, and Exercise Intention in Older Adults

2004· article· en· W2072476178 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy C. Gyurcsik, Paul A. Estabrooks

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Social Psychology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCoping (psychology)Self-efficacyCognitionClinical psychologyCoping behaviorDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two purposes of this study were to identify the types of acute thoughts older adults experienced when making exercise decisions and the strategies used to cope with negative thoughts. The third purpose was to examine the relationships between acute thoughts, coping self‐efficacy, and the outcomes of decisional struggle and exercise intention. Participants were 117 exercising older adults (M age = 72 years). Acute thoughts, coping strategies and self‐efficacy, decisional struggle, and intention measures were taken concurrently. Results indicate that older adults experienced both acute positive and negative thoughts. To cope with negative thoughts, participants used cognitive and behavioral strategies. Further, coping self‐efficacy significantly predicted decisional struggle and intention.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.660

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.401
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Social PsychologySame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207