Karate practice: empowering solutions to mitigate school-age bullying
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Karate is a martial art and it is known that its practice promotes cognitive, affective, social, and behavioral benefits, including in children. Bullying has been configured in recent years as a public health problem that can seriously affect school-age children and young people. Although the practice of karate is positively associated with the biopsychosocial development of children and adolescents, little is known about its impact on bullying behaviors among school-age peers. The aim of this study is to evaluate the influence of karate practices on the psychosocial responses of children regarding episodes of victimization, aggression, and observation of bullying behaviors. A questionnaire was applied to 336 Portuguese children (79 karatekas and 257 non-karate practitioners). The data were examined using the Chi-square test or the Fisher test and the V Cramer test. Concerning the bullying phenomenon, our results show that karate practitioners differ from non-practitioners by the lower number of times they are victims of aggression (p <0.05), /showing to be more resilient in the victimization process. Karate practice is recommended for children as a way to assist their psychosocial development. Key words: karate, martial art, bullying, victimization, aggression, proactivity
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".