MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896252089 · doi:10.1177/1557988318802691

“The Social Side Is as Important as the Physical Side”: Older Men’s Experiences of Physical Activity

2018· article· en· W2896252089 on OpenAlexafffund
Joanie Sims‐Gould, Rei Ahn, Neville Li, Callista A. Ottoni, Dawn C. Mackey, Heather McKay

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Men s Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersInstitute of Gender and Health
KeywordsSocial connectednessMasculinityPsychologyPhysical activityAutonomyPsychological resilienceSocial psychologyHegemonic masculinityPhotovoiceGerontologyGender studiesDevelopmental psychologySociologyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

North American "hegemonic masculinity" values strength, autonomy, independence, and resilience among its ideals. As men age, their capacity is increasingly challenged and demands that they adapt to new physical and social realities. Although some reports on effective health-promoting programs for men are emerging, there is a need to better understand older men's experiences with their mobility and physical activity. This is a photovoice study with men ( N = 14) who were enrolled in a choice-based activity program for low active men. Based on in-depth interviews and analysis of over 800 photographs, three key themes emerged: the importance of social connectedness, supportive environments, and positive attitude toward the future. Findings are presented via a theoretical view of masculinities as socially constructed through relational behaviors and norms. Analyses provide insight into older men's motivation to be physically active and highlight the need for programs and policies customized to promote physical activity of older men.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0020.002
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.367 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Men s HealthSame topicGender Roles and Identity StudiesFrench-language works237,207