The Role of Cycling in Sustainable Urban Life: Perception of Cyclists in Turkey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the perceptions of bicyclists to promote the use of bicycles in the cities. The sample was selected using simple random sampling method. A total of 1087 bicyclists, including 178 women and 909 men, who used bicycles in their everyday lives in the city, voluntarily participated in the research. The study was a descriptive research in the survey model and quantitative research approach was adopted in the research. Data were collected with “Bike Use Dissemination Scale” developed by Çeyiz (2019). The scale consists of two parts; a personal information form and expressions of participants’ dissemination of bicycle use. The t-test was used for the variables consisting of the bipartite groups and the One-Way ANOVA was used for the variables consisting of more than two groups. According to the data obtained from the bicyclists participating in the survey, there was a significant difference in the dimensions of security and dissemination by gender. It was found that women bicyclists’ safety perceptions were more negative than men’s perception; and their perceptions of the spreading dimension were more positive than the male bicyclists.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".