MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2253284901

The Leisure Style of Canadian Rural Recreation Participants

2010· article· en· W2253284901 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Paul Heintzman, Don Dawson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of rural and community development · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationTourismLeisure studiesHobbyRural areaPsychologyLeisure satisfactionPreferenceCompetence (human resources)Outdoor activityStyle (visual arts)GeographySocioeconomicsSociologySocial psychologyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to investigate the leisure styles of rural recreationists in Canada. The study involved a secondary analysis of data from a previous study, with a sample of 248 Canadians, which gathered data on four dimensions of leisure style: time use, leisure setting, leisure activity participation, and leisure motivation (Heintzman & Mannell, 2003). Correlation analyses were conducted on the data to determine if frequency of participation in three rural leisure settings was related to other dimensions of leisure style. The analysis revealed the following: Nonurban Natural Area Visitors were characterized by participation in outdoor, cultural, social, and travel and tourism activities, motivated by stimulus-avoidance motivations, and had a preference for other natural leisure settings in addition to nonurban natural areas; Pastoral/Rural Visitors were characterized by participation in outdoor, cultural, social, hobby, and personal development activities, motivated by intellectual and competence-mastery motivations, and had a preference for nonurban natural areas, cottage or lodge settings, urban and near-urban natural areas, and quiet urban recreation areas in addition to pastoral/rural areas; Cottage and Lodge Setting Visitors were characterized by participation in outdoor, cultural, social, sports, and travel and tourism activities, motivated by competence-mastery and social motivations, and had a preference for pastoral/rural areas in addition to cottage and lodge settings. Keywords: rural recreation, leisure style, natural areas, pastoral areas, cottages

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)0.002
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 score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of rural and community developmentSame topicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness ManagementFrench-language works237,207