MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971102322 · doi:10.1163/24054933-12340024

Sociability Associations: A Literature Review

2018· review· en· W2971102322 on OpenAlexaff
Robert A. Stebbins

Bibliographic record

VenueVoluntaristics Review · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasualRecreationContext (archaeology)PsychologyThe artsPublic relationsSocial psychologyPerspective (graphical)Empirical researchVoluntary associationSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Fellowship and friendly social relations during free time, referred to here as leisure-based sociability, is a prominent reward of participation in many groups based on volunteer membership, consisting for this review mainly of amateurs, hobbyists, altruistically oriented volunteers, and the associations of these three. This benefit is analyzed according to two subtypes: sociable nonprofit associations and social clubs. The goal of this issue of the Voluntaristics Review is to examine the leisure component of these two subtypes as framed in the serious leisure perspective ( SLP ) as set out in Stebbins (2007 [2015], in press; see also www.seriousleisure.net ), put nonprofit sociability in organizational context, and then review the empirical literature bearing on it. Studies and theoretic treatises approaching nonprofit groups from another angle (e.g., organizational structure, management issues, funding sources, governmental regulation, type of employment) are not reviewed. Specifically, this review centers on the relevant books, articles, and chapters listed in the SLP website, which itself centers on amateurs, hobbyists, and career volunteers (the serious pursuits), casual leisure, and project-based interests and includes its extensions in the theory and research on the leisure-related aspects of aging and retirement, arts and science administration, library and information science, positive psychology, therapeutic recreation and disability studies, and tourism and event analysis. Compared with the various specialties in leisure studies, the SLP casts by far the broadest theoretical and empirical net in that interdisciplinary field. The research reviewed shows that such talk—generically known as socializing—reflects one or more of fourteen themes. In general, members find sociability in these clubs and associations in and around the core activities they pursue there and on which the two subtypes have formed. The studies reviewed here, taken together, provide considerable validation of the proposition that leisure-based sociability is a prominent reward of participation evident in a multitude of volunteer groups. Leisure-based sociability is itself micro-analytic in scope, but viewed through the lens of the SLP , it can be further understood using meso- and macro levels of analysis.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.010

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.359 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 venueVoluntaristics ReviewSame topicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness ManagementFrench-language works237,207