Society and Leisure: 40 years of publications on research in recreation and health.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the 40-year anniversary of Loisir et Société/Society and Leisure, it was interesting to take stock of the articles that were published in connection with the theme of leisure and health. The last 40 years of publications have thus been scrutinized based on precise selection criteria. For this first analysis, 131 articles were selected. A qualitative analysis was carried out and shed light on four recurring themes related to leisure, health and the optimal development of individuals: (1) reflection on the theoretical foundations; (2) recreation and population with special needs; (3) leisure and health maintenance; and (4) leisure experience and development of individuals. A quantitative analysis was then conducted to highlight trends in five-year increments over the last 40 years. The results of these analyses are then discussed to put into perspective the evolution of the literature in the field of leisure and health according to various issues that have affected society over the years.
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 | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.023 | 0.037 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.011 |
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".