MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314335201 · doi:10.5993/ajhb.37.4.5

Understanding Parental Support of Child Physical Activity Behavior

2013· article· en· W2314335201 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Health Behavior · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPhysical activityTheory of planned behaviorPerceptionPsychologySocial cognitive theorySocial supportDevelopmental psychologyCognitionSample (material)Control (management)Perceived controlSocial psychologyMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine parental support of child physical activity with an adapted theory of planned behavior model. METHODS: A representative sample of Canadian mothers (N = 663) who completed measures of family priorities, social cognition, and child physical activity. RESULTS: An assessment of family priorities showed that mothers ranked physical activity almost as high as homework and far higher than other activities. Attitude about providing support for child physical activity predicted intention, yet only perceived control over support predicted behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Mothers perceive great import of physical activity for their children but they are inhibited by a low perception of control.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.294 · 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