Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to examine the leadership behaviors levels of university students studying in the Sports Management Department. The sample of the research consists of 148 students (male n=112, female n=36) aged between 18 and 28 years. In this study, the Personal Information Form was created in order to learn the characteristics of the participants such as gender, age groups, the status of doing sports as an athlete and the status of volunteering in sports events. The Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ), which was translated into the Turkish Language by Atar and Özbek (2009), was used as a data collection tool. The mean score of the students was 4.142 in the dimension of initiating structure and was 3.760 in the dimension of consideration. According to the results of the analysis, the initiating structure dimension scores differed according to variables of gender, the status of doing sports as an athlete and the status of volunteering in sports events. The consideration dimension scores differed age groups and the status of volunteering in sports events. In addition, it was found that there was a linear and significant relationship between scores of initiating structure and consideration.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".