Effects of Group‐Based Exercise on Flourishing and Stigma Consciousness among Older Adults: Findings from a Randomised Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To examine the extent to which group-based exercise programs, informed by self-categorisation theory, result in improvements in psychological flourishing and reductions in age- and gender-related stigma consciousness among older adults. METHODS: In the study, older adults (N = 485, ≥ 65 years) were randomised to similar age same gender (SASG), similar age mixed gender (SAMG), or "standard" mixed age mixed gender (MAMG) group-based exercise programs. Flourishing and stigma consciousness were assessed on six occasions during the 24-week intervention and represented secondary trial outcomes. Multilevel growth models examined the effects of the interventions on flourishing and stigma consciousness over time. RESULTS: Participants in the SASG and SAMG conditions demonstrated, on average, higher levels of flourishing, relative to the MAMG condition, over the course of the 24 weeks (p < .05). Additionally, participants demonstrated lower levels of age- and gender-related stigma consciousness in both the SASG and SAMG conditions relative to the MAMG condition (p < .05). No time by group interaction effects were observed for either flourishing or stigma consciousness. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide some support for the utility of group exercise programs, informed by self-categorisation theory, to enhance psychological flourishing and reduce stigma consciousness among older adults.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".