MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2119327855

Weight Loss Self-Efficacy and Modelled Behaviour: Gaining Competence through Example.

2011· article· en· W2119327855 on OpenAlexaffvenue
B. Schulz, Marvin J. McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsTrinity Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelf-efficacyWeight lossPsychologyCompetence (human resources)Physical activityLife styleClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyGerontologyPhysical therapyMedicineApplied psychologyPsychotherapistSocial psychologyObesity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Weight Efficacy Life-Style Questionnaire (WEL) and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) assessed self-efficacy and physical activity for 124 volunteers aged 17–61. It was administered before and after participants attended a video modelling workshop. Half of the participants in the treatment and control groups were given copies of the videos to review at home. Predictions were that self-efficacy would increase most for participants who took home the videos after the group-based intervention that was built on models of successful weight loss behaviours. Self-efficacy was also expected to lead to increased physical activity. Results demonstrated that weight loss self-efficacy can be increased by watching successful models. Physical activity, however, did not increase.

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)0.011
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy→Same topicEating Disorders and Behaviors→French-language works237,207→