MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Relatedness to Others in Physical Activity Scale: Evidence for Structural and Criterion Validity

2010· article· en· W2170994672 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 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial connectednessConfirmatory factor analysisShort FormsCriterion validityStructural equation modelingScale (ratio)Competence (human resources)Concurrent validityAutonomyTest validityDevelopmental psychologyPsychometricsSocial psychologyClinical psychologyConstruct validityStatisticsInternal consistencyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to test the structural and criterion validity of scores derived from the Relatedness to Others in Physical Activity Scale (ROPAS). The participants ( n 1 = 893; n 2 = 522) completed the ROPAS in addition to demographic questions (study 1) and well‐being indicators (study 2) using cross‐sectional, nonexperimental surveys. Confirmatory factor analysis (study 1) supported the tenability of a 6‐item ROPAS measurement model that was invariant across gender. Higher ROPAS scores were associated with greater perceived autonomy and competence and greater well‐being (study 2). Overall, these findings suggested the ROPAS displays a number of psychometric properties that render the instrument useful for investigating issues of belonging and connectedness with others in global physical activity settings.

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)0.003
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 score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 head0.253
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.265 · 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