The Effect of Peer-Mediated Adaptive Physical Activity Program on Problem Behaviors of Mentally Handicapped Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of peer-mediated adaptive physical activity program on problem behaviors of mentally handicapped students. Eight mentally handicapped students and eight peer students with normal development participated in this study, which was designed according to a sequential descriptive design. In the research, peer education program was applied to the peer students in line with the skills expected to be exhibited during the practices. In the study, Problem Behavior Sub-Scale (PBS), which is one of the subscales of Social Skills Rating System (SSRS) developed by Gresham and Elliot (1990) and Turkish adaptation by Sucuoglu and Ozokcu (2005) was used as a quantitative data collection tool. As a qualitative data collection tool, semi-structured interview form was used. The Friedman test was used to analyze the quantitative data, and Wilcoxon Signs test was used to determine the source of the difference. Significance value was determined as 0.05. In the analysis of qualitative data, content analysis was applied. The quantitative findings of the study showed that the peer-mediated APA program was effective on the problem behaviors of mentally handicapped students and that the skills acquired as a result of the practice were maintained by the children three weeks after the completion of the practices. In the qualitative findings, the teachers stated that after the peer-mediated APA program, there were positive developments in the ability of mentally handicapped students to experience push-pull, touch discomfort, fear, trust, power control with their peers and to act in accordance with the instructions. The obtained qualitative and quantitative findings showed that peer mediated APA program had positive effects on the problem behaviors of mentally handicapped students.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".