Development and Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Golf Participation Questionnaire for Older Adults (GPQOA)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of four studies were conducted to develop and psychometrically evaluate a questionnaire to assess older adults’ reasons for participating in golf (Golf Participation Questionnaire for Older Adults: GPQOA). In the first study, a 30-item questionnaire was developed using a Delphi process in collaboration with industry partners and academic leaders. In the second study, Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used to identify the best model fit based on data from 402 adults aged 55–74. A revised version was then tested in a third study using an independent sample of 419 adults and provided support for a nine-factor 30-item model. In the final study, measurement invariance across gender was evaluated and supported. The GPQOA is an empirically driven questionnaire with psychometric support that can be used to investigate the reasons for and benefits of participating in regular golf for older adults.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it