Sitting through life? Psychosocial Antecedents of Sedentary Behaviour in a Post-Secondary Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, there is a paucity of research on the psychosocial antecedents of sedentary behaviour (SB) in a post-secondary setting. Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) constructs may influence sedentary behaviour amongst students. Further, normative messages may be one tool for altering perceptions of sedentary behaviour. However, the effect of descriptive norm messages on sedentary behaviour is currently unknown. The primary purpose of this study is to examine students’ perceptions of sedentary behaviour; the secondary purpose is to investigate whether the receipt of a normative message is an efficacious tool for reducing students’ sedentary behaviour. Post-secondary students will complete an online questionnaire and will randomly receive an injunctive norm, descriptive norm, or control sedentary behaviour message. The questionnaire will measure demographics, TPB constructs, and self-reported SB. One week later, they will complete the same questionnaire. Multiple regression and ANOVAs will be used to address the two study purposes, respectively. Results may inform future interventions aimed at decreasing students’ sedentary behaviour levels.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".