Can a Simple Distraction Lower Fear Levels During a Sudden Scary Outdoor Situation?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adventure-based teaching can foster social and personal growth yet can scare and cause long-lasting anxiety in some group members. This study examined the effects of a simple distraction to lower stress levels during an approaching scary event. Forty-eight males (M = 20.2 years) were randomly assigned to one of four groups. The stressor involved participants walking on a 3-m tower while blindfolded and jumping off into a pool. Self-report questionnaires, digital counters, heart rate, and peripheral temperature measures were used. A two-way analysis of variance indicated no significant difference in trait and state anxiety/ sensation seeking. However, a post hoc Scheffé’s test found significant changes in heart rate between the experimental groups and the control groups. Though not statistically different, the study’s results suggest that distractions affect heart rate, peripheral temperature, and state anxiety/sensation seeking, with raw scores rising (5% and 18%, respectively, for the latter). Future studies should consider other distraction-type strategies in which stress levels may hamper safety during group adventure activities.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".