MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2187958767 · doi:10.26524/1421

Motivation to Move with Exergaming in Online Physical Education

2014· article· en· W2187958767 on OpenAlexaff
Brian J. Kooiman, Dwayne P. Sheehan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Physical Education Fitness and Sports · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumEntertainmentThe InternetPsychologyPhysical educationMathematics educationPhysical activityMultimediaPedagogyComputer scienceMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivation to move is critical in online physical education (OLPE). This study looked at the motivational aspect of remote exergaming versus another student versus proximally against a console generated non-player character (NPC). Research shows that students in grades 4-12 are motivated to play exergames because they are native gamers. The entertainment value of the exergame garners more effort from the students than they realize they are expending. This research showed that exergames are motivating for students (N=124) aged 11-18 in grades 6-12. The subjects reported high motivation to participate while playing both a computer-generated NPC and a remote human opponent over the internet. Scores for motivation were highest when subjects played another student over the internet but were also high for proximal NPC play. This research positions exergaming as a potential piece of OLPE curriculum that can help students access the emotional aspect of physical education curriculum.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations13
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Physical Education Fitness and SportsSame topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207