From dabbler to serious amateur musician and beyond: Clarifying a crucial step
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Dabbling is casual leisure, a hedonic activity common in music as well as in a number of other free-time interests. In the past, dabbling has been inadequately conceptualized, one result being some misunderstanding about its nature and its contribution to leisure and even to professional work. By way of clarification we look first at the contemporary explanation of dabbling as set out according to the serious leisure perspective, a main analytic framework in the field of leisure studies. This explanation proceeds from two related articles written by Gates and Jorgensen. Next, dabbling as a leisure activity in music is considered in detail, particularly as it relates to children. This includes an examination of its nature and its role in initiating a leisure/work career in music, as experienced in the passage from dabbler to neophyte amateur and on possibly to professional.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".