Children's Experiences Wearing Pedometers in a Telephone-Delivered Imagery Intervention Aimed at Increasing Active Play
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Much of what we know about pedometer interventions and imagery interventions with children is grounded in quantitative data. The general purpose of the present study was to qualitatively explore the experiences of children who had participated in a 4-week imagery intervention designed to increase active play. Specifically, the current study investigated children's experiences with (a) wearing pedometers and (b) listening to audio recordings (imagery scripts and short stories) via an automated telephone system. METHOD: Two focus-group interviews were conducted with a subsample of children (aged 9-10 years) who had completed the imagery intervention: 1 interview with children from the imagery group (n = 7) and 1 with children from the control group (n = 5). RESULTS: Findings indicated that children enjoyed wearing pedometers. At the same time, children reported some complaints about wearing these devices (e.g., they are uncomfortable). Children also described that the automated telephone system was fun to use, despite the fact that it was difficult to remember to call the system 3 times each week. Finally, children in the imagery group noted that the imagery scripts were easy to imagine and motivated them to engage in active play, while children in the control group found the short stories interesting. CONCLUSION: The results of the current study can help researchers and practitioners develop and implement effective pedometer and imagery interventions with children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".