A Photovoice Project: Urban Elementary Girls’ Perspectives on Physical Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Photovoice is a community-based participatory research method where participants can showcase their life experiences through photography. The objective of this study was to have adolescent girls attending an after-school program use photovoice to represent their perceptions of physical activity practices. Photovoice was used to allow adolescent girls to express their perspectives, through photographs and narratives, of their personal and community strengths and concerns related to their involvement in physical activity. The phenomenological methodology was used as a framework for the study. Qualitative analyses were conducted throughout the research process. Constant comparison was used to analyze the focus group, scrapbook data, and notes recorded by the author to determine key themes and ideas. Participants for the study included 14 girls attending a school in an urban area. Benefits of physical activity as provided by the girls in their personal lives and the community included: understanding activity contributed to wellness, increased social opportunities, and the school as a hub of activities. Personal and community barriers to physical activity included: lack of neighbourhood safety, being involved in other sedentary activities, parental rules restricting outside play, outside conditions, personal choices to not exercise, and a lack of opportunity to exercise. Potential ways to increase physical activity among these participants are to create more group games and activities at the after-school program daily. Involving parents in activities with the girls at home may increase physical activity levels while at home.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".