MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Positive Exerciser Stereotype: The Role of Gender Stereotype of the Activity

2008· article· en· W2164549159 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Applied Biobehavioral Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyStereotype (UML)PersonalityDevelopmental psychologyMultivariate analysis of varianceSocial psychologyPhysical activityMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to examine if the positive exerciser stereotype exists when participating in opposite‐gender stereotyped activities. Participants ( N = 313) were randomly assigned to read a paragraph about one of eight targets (female or male, participating in a masculine‐stereotyped activity, feminine‐stereotyped activity, gender‐neutral activity, or control). They then rated the target on personality and physical dimensions. A multivariate analysis of variance for personality attributes showed only one difference: The male target was rated as more masculine than the female target. For physical attributes, significant differences were found for target gender and activity type. In general, exercisers were rated more positively than controls regardless of exercise type. This study found that the positive exerciser stereotype occurred regardless of gender stereotype of the activity.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.274 · 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