Measurement, Statistics, and Research Design Issues in Sport and Exercise Psychology
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A major purpose of the 8th Measurement and Evaluation Symposium, Exploring the Kaleidoscope was to explore measurement, research design, and statistics issues in selected subdisciplines of exercise and sport science. Attitudes, perceptions, and treatment of persons with a disability over the last 150 years have been guided by several ideologies. This chapter explains the overview of changes in perceptions, attitudes, and treatment of persons labeled mentally handicapped. The late 1950s and early 1960s raised awareness about the treatment mentally handicapped persons were receiving in institutions. A shocked public became aware of behaviors like head banging, crying, biting, vomiting, assaulting, screeching, rocking, and sleeping observed in overcrowded institutions. A movement toward deinstitutionalisation and normalization began, and the services-based model gained momentum. The chapter concludes that the suggest measurement, research design, and statistics problems that need to be addressed in order to ultimately study self-empowerment and self-regulation.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it