MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220932828 · doi:10.1123/jsep.2021-0253

Relationships Between Physical Activity, Boredom Proneness, and Subjective Well-Being Among U.K. Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2022· article· en· W4220932828 on OpenAlexaff
Ashley McCurdy, Jodie A. Stearns, Ryan E. Rhodes, Debbie Hopkins, Kerry Mummery, John C. Spence

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sport and Exercise Psychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMind wandering and attention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoredomPsychologyHappinessWell-beingContext (archaeology)AnxietyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Bivariate analysisClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This investigation sought to examine physical activity (PA) as a potential determinant of chronic boredom and associated well-being within the context of COVID-related restrictions. A representative sample of U.K. adults (N = 1,521) completed a survey on June 1, 2020. Bivariate analyses demonstrated that individuals who met guidelines and maintained or increased PA scored higher on life satisfaction, worthwhileness, and happiness and lower on anxiety (i.e., indicators of well-being) and boredom proneness (d = 0.13-0.43). Boredom proneness was correlated with all indicators of well-being (r = .38-.54). A series of regression models revealed that PA predicted lower boredom proneness and better life satisfaction, worthwhileness, and happiness. Boredom proneness accounted for the covariance between PA and well-being. Prospective research is needed to confirm causality of the observed relationships.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sport and Exercise PsychologySame topicMind wandering and attentionFrench-language works237,207