MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111703460 · doi:10.5539/ass.v8n10p240

The Evaluation of the Degree of Applying Risk Management Behaviors among Sports Councils in East of Iran

2012· article· en· W2111703460 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Ehsani, Korosh Veisi

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLeadership, Courage, and Heroism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaCoachingDescriptive statisticsRisk managementPsychologyDescriptive researchData collectionApplied psychologyBusinessSociologyStatisticsFinanceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study is to determine the degree of applying risk management behaviors among managers and directors of sports councils in Khorasan province which is located in the east of Iran. The method was descriptive-analytic, and conducted on all the managers and directors of sports councils. The samples was included 126 managers and directors of sports councils in Khorasan who had been working in the East area (Khorasan). The questionnaire (risk management, Aeron. 2004) was used and Cronbach Alpha was .87 which was satisfactory. Descriptive and inferential statistics (Kruskal Wallis H, Kendall & Pearson), have been used in data analysis. The findings of the research showed that there isn’t any meaningful relationship between levels of education, the employment status, coaching status and risk management behaviors, while there was meaningful relationship between field of education)p? 0.006), coaching experience(p?0.033, r=0.185), managing experience(p?0.001, r= 0.260) and risk management behaviors. As a whole we can say that the level of performance of risk management behaviors among the sports councils in Kuhorsan province has a desirable condition. It was also found that staff directors performed risk management behaviors better than line directors.

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)0.005
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 score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicLeadership, Courage, and Heroism StudiesFrench-language works237,207