The Effects of Rhythm and Dance Games on Aggression in Students with Mild Mental Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to examine the effects of rhythm and dance on the aggression levels of students with mild mental disabilities. The sample group of the study consists of 40 students with mild mental disability, 20 of whom are in the experimental group and 20 in the control group, who continue their education in schools affiliated with the Kilis Provincial Directorate of National Education. Buss-Perry’s (1992) aggression scale was applied as pre-test and post-test to both groups, and rhythm and dance training was given to the experimental group for 2 hours, 2 days a week for 8 weeks. In the analysis of the data obtained, frequency and percentage analysis were performed by using the SPSS 22.0 program, and dependent and independent t-test was used in the analysis of the pre-test and post-test data. No significant results were obtained in the pre-test scores of the experimental and control groups (p > 0.05). In the evaluation made between the experimental group and the control group, a significant result was reached in the post-test scores in favor of the experimental group (p < 0.05). In conclusion, based on the data obtained, we can say that rhythm and dance games positively reduce the aggression levels of children with mild mental disabilities.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".