Validation of the Polish version of the Self-reported Experiences of Activity Settings (SEAS) questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Despite the growing interest in various forms of leisure time management and their influence on various aspects of human life, still not enough attention is paid to understanding individual experiences of participation in classes. It is important not only what we do, but also how the activity affects overall well-being, functioning and role play in society. Objective: The aim of this work is to present the process of validation of the Polish version of the Self-reported Experiences of Activity Settings (SEAS) questionnaire. Material and methods: The study was conducted in a group of 153 people aged 10-22 years (mean 15.5 ± 3.3). The study participants were divided into four groups. The process of translation and cultural adaptation was carried out according to international rules developed by ISPOR. Results: The alpha Cronbach index for the whole questionnaire was 0.953. The internal alpha Cronbach index for question groups in the Polish version of the TeDeMAR questionnaire was higher or equal to 0.70 and close to the values of this index in the English version of the questionnaire. The results of the constancy test performed in group 4 showed no statistically significant differences (p>0.05) between the individual question groups. Conclusions: The TeDeMAR questionnaire, as the Polish version of the SEAS questionnaire, met all validation criteria.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".