The Relationship between Life Satisfaction and Academic Performance: An Example of Sports Science
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
Everyday stress, happiness, health status and individual characteristics affect life satisfaction, which, in turn, affectsome other factors. Therefore, high life satisfaction in academics affects their academic performance positively. Theaim of this study is to examine the relationship between sports science academics’ life satisfaction and academicperformance. Study sample consisted of 188 male and 151 female sports science academics working in differentregions. Data were collected using the “Contentment with Life Assessment Scale” (CLAS) developed by Lavallee,Hatch, Michalos & McKinley (2007), and adapted to Turkish language by Akın and Yılmaz (2015), and the“Perceived Academic Performance Scale” developed by Gür (2017). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics,t-test, one-way variance analysis (ANOVA), Tukey multiple comparison test and correlation test. Results show thatmale academics have better academic performance than female academics. Results show no statistically significantrelationship between life satisfaction and academic performance.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it