MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2517278346 · doi:10.17161/jas.v2i2.5711

Exploring the Information Source Preferences Among Canadian Adult Golf League Members

2016· article· en· W2517278346 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Melissa Davies, Dianna P. Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Amateur Sport · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueRecreationSample (material)Information source (mathematics)PsychologyMarketingAdvertisingBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With an aging demographic, and the abundance of physical inactivity in Canada, sport professionals need to understand how best to recruit and retain adults in sport and recreational activities, namely, golf leagues. Canadian golf league participants (N = 419; Mage = 62 years old) completed an online survey detailing their propensity to utilize a variety of information sources prior to making the decision to join a golf league. Results from a principal component analysis of a revised Information Sources Inventory, suggested that golfers in this sample were most likely to utilize Personal and Social sources of information associated with their league participation decision. While no differences emerged in information source preferences across Age or levels of Involvement, women (m = 4.12, SD = 1.30) were significantly more likely to utilize Public information sources than were men (m = 3.64, SD = 1.26). Implications from the information source preferences are discussed with the goal of generating more effective marketing strategies to recruit new golfers, lapsed golfers, or golfers who do not currently engage in league play.

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)0.001
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 score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Amateur SportSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207