Leisure Involvement and Happiness Levels of Individuals Having Fitness Center Membership
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
The aim of the study is to investigate the leisure involvement and happiness levels of the individuals who have any fitness center membership. Screening model was used in the research. The sample group of the research was composed of a total of 599 voluntary participants, 260 being “females” and 339 being “males”, who were using fitness centers and were selected using improbable purposeful sampling method. “Oxford Happiness Scale Short Form—OHS-F”, developed by Hills and Argyle (2002) and adapted into Turkish by Doğan and Cotok (2011) along with “Leisure Involvement Scale—LIS-F”, developed by Kyle et al. (2007) and adapted into Turkish by Gurbuz et al. (2018) were used in the study in addition to “Personal Information Form”. Descriptive statistical method (frequency, arithmetic mean, standard deviation) was used for the identification of the distribution of the participants’ information. In order to determine if the data had normal distribution or not, Shapiro-Wilk test for normality was conducted and in consequence of this test, t-test, single factorial MANOVA, ANOVA and Pearson Correlation tests were administered upon determining that the data were in accordance with parametric test conditions. According to the findings, while there was no significant difference found in the happiness levels in line with the gender, marital status and education levels of the participants; a significant difference was determined in the leisure involvement levels according to education level and gender, and yet no significant difference was found between the leisure involvement level and marital status. Besides, a positively significant relationship was determined between the level of happiness and leisure involvement. The restraints as well as the evaluations for future studies were discussed in this sense.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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