MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3005037377 · doi:10.5539/jel.v9n2p76

Sportsmanship Behavioral Tendencies of the Students Athletes in Turkey: Ardahan Example

2020· article· en· W3005037377 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdullah Küşad Akbulut

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSportsmanshipAthletesPsychologyValue (mathematics)Social psychologyScale (ratio)PerceptionValues educationMathematics educationStatisticsMathematicsPhysical therapyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study is to analyze sportsmanship behavioral tendencies of the students of secondary education who are being schooled within the provincial center of Ardahan by taking several variables into consideration. In accordance with this aim, this study has been conducted through the survey modelling of quantitative research methods. For the data analysis, T-Testing and ANOVA are applied. According to the obtained findings, the sportsmanship level of student-sportsmen is revealed to be higher than student-sportswomen. In addition to this, the 1st question has the maximum value within the scale with the average value of 4.0248. The minimum value, on the other hand, belongs to the 22nd question with the value of 2.9684. The general average of the scale is 3.4815, located in-between Agree-Not Sure. Consequently, it can be claimed that the perception and the level of sportsmanship are high. As a result, it is concluded that the sportsmanship level of the student-sportspeople residing in Ardahan is relatively high and that the sportsmen have a higher sportsmanship level compared to that of sportswomen.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.313 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and Learning→Same topicSport Psychology and Performance→French-language works237,207→