MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389453515 · doi:10.1080/14927713.2023.2291024

Constraints on outdoor leisure participation among Thai families with young children

2023· article· en· W4389453515 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
An Uesugi

Bibliographic record

VenueLeisure/Loisir · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesLeisure timePhysical activityGeographyPolitical scienceArtMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While outdoor leisure activities provide numerous health and wellness benefits, there has been a dramatic decrease in the time that young people spend in active outdoor play. As the outdoors are regarded as the primary tourism resource sustaining Thailand’s economy, it is important to conduct effective outdoor leisure program planning for a sustainable society. This study focused on family outdoor leisure as a significant influence on children’s outdoor opportunities, specified the outdoor leisure constraints on Thai parents with young children, and examined whether individuals from distinct profiles based on constraint patterns differ in the frequency of outdoor leisure participation. The study found five constraining factors affecting Thai parents: health and physical fitness, interpersonal, time commitment, facilities, and opportunity. Time and opportunity constraints were key factors affecting the frequency with which Thai families participated in outdoor leisure activities. Implications for outdoor leisure program planning and service provision are also discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeisure/LoisirSame topicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness ManagementFrench-language works237,207