MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378894351 · doi:10.1177/1089313x06010001-205

The Relationship between Passion and Injury in Dance Students

2006· article· en· W4378894351 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dance Medicine & Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDiversity and Impact of Dance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDancePassionPridePsychologyCoping (psychology)MedicinePhysical therapyClinical psychologySocial psychologyArtVisual artsTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study explored whether dancers exhibit distinct injury profiles and injury-related coping behaviors as a function of their passion for dance. Results from 81 student dancers suggest that having a harmonious passion for dance is associated with suffering less from acute injuries, exhibiting more problem-focused health-promoting and less health-undermining coping behaviors when injured, being more flexibly involved in dance activities when injured, and engaging in self-initiated injury prevention. Obsessive passion for dance, on the other hand, is associated with prolonged suffering from chronic injuries, more rigid involvement in dance activities when injured, and the tendency to report that pride is a major factor preventing one from obtaining adequate treatment. Thus, it appears that obsessive passion for dance may constitute a risk factor for sustaining chronic injuries, and that harmonious passion is the more optimal motivational foundation for long-term, healthful involvement in dance.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.390
Teacher spread0.346 · 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