MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903614021 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v7n6p129

Investigation of Reasons of Social Media Usage of Physical Education and Sports School Students

2018· article· en· W2903614021 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mehmet Yıldırım, Sema Uslu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical educationSocial mediaAcademic yearPsychologyStatistical analysisThe InternetSample (material)Significant differenceMathematics educationMedical educationComputer scienceMathematicsStatisticsMedicineWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research is to determine the reasons of social media usage of students studying in school of physical education and sport. The universe of the research was created 750 students from Yozgat Bozok University School of Physical Education and Sports. The sample of the study consisted of 283 students who were studying at different departments of Physical Education and Sport Department of Yozgat Bozok University in 2018-2019 academic year. Survey method was used in the study. Information on the demographic characteristics of the students was obtained by ‘personal information form. Information about determining the reasons of social media usage for students, Cemrek et al. (2014) developed by the usage of social media scale was obtained. The data were transferred to SPSS 18 software program for statistical operations. Frequency analysis, percentage analysis, arithmetic mean, t test, Anova analysis and post hoc tests were used to analyze the data.As a result of the analyzes performed; Statistically significant differences were found among the reasons of social media usage according to the education department, the purpose of using the internet, the most followed social media tool and the time variables spent on social media during the day (p<.05). There were no statistically significant differences according to gender variable (p>.05).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.384
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207