MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889813078 · doi:10.3390/sports6030099

A Brief Review of Personality in Marathon Runners: The Role of Sex, Age and Performance Level

2018· review· en· W2889813078 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSports · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society for Exercise Physiology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationPersonalityPsychologyApplied psychologySocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The participation of recreational runners in sport events ranging from 5 km to ultra-endurance races have increased dramatically during the last decades and this phenomenon has attracted scientific interest. Most research has focused on the physiological characteristics of these runners and less in their psychological characteristics. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to review the existing knowledge with regards to the personality of recreational endurance runners and the role of sex, age and performance. It was concluded that limited information was available with regards to the personality of recreational marathon runners. So far, our knowledge on the personality of marathon runners relied on studies conducted a few decades ago, mostly on competitive marathon runners, highlighting the need for original research on recreational runners.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.269 · 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