Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid increase observed in the number of studies conducted on leisure time in the international arena is directly related to the changes in the dynamic structure of modern society and the rise of gender equality awareness. The active participation of women in leisure time activities has played an important role in diversifying and deepening academic studies on this subject. While the gender variable is included in many studies as a demographic element, it is wondered how and how often women-focused studies are included in this vast and dynamic literature. To guide future studies and analyze current trends, we conducted research on leisure time and women's studies using the bibliometric analysis method. The Web of Science database provided the data for the research, while the VOSviewer program carried out the analysis. The search using the keywords "leisure" and "women" yielded a total of 9532 publications, indicating research on these publications since 1975 and a significant increase in this field since 1997. Leisure and women's studies, as an interdisciplinary field, is included in a total of 187 different disciplines, which clearly reveals the scope and diversity of interest in the literature. It was observed that the majority of the studies focused on the themes of physical activity, exercise, gender, women, and leisure. The findings show that leisure and women's studies were addressed by 146 different countries, and it was determined that the highest contributions came from countries such as the USA, England, Australia, and Canada. The studies conducted in these countries are notable not only in terms of the breadth of the topics but also in terms of scientific citation networks and academic collaboration levels. As a result of this study, it is determined that leisure and women-themed studies have a multifaceted and innovative character; therefore, it is understood that this field offers a broad perspective for future research both thematically and methodologically. In this context, it is recommended that leisure and women's studies be addressed more comprehensively in the future, not only at the individual level but also in macro dimensions such as social development, health, and cultural change.
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 | 0.021 | 0.101 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.263 | 0.328 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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".