MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409240939 · doi:10.1080/07053436.2025.2474290

Moderating effects of recreation opportunities on the relationship between leisure and wellbeing among children and youth

2025· article· en· W4409240939 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mingjie Gao, Bryan Smale, Elisabeth C. Wells, Bruna Redoschi

Bibliographic record

VenueLoisir et Société / Society and Leisure · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationPsychologyLeisure activityDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated relationships between leisure participation, social connections, and overall wellbeing among children and youth, and examined moderating effects of perceived quality and accessibility of recreation facilities and of constraints on this relationship. Using data provided by children and youth aged 9 to 18 years from a 2021 survey, feelings of loneliness were found to significantly mediate the association between leisure participation and wellbeing. Greater perceived access to recreation facilities and fewer perceived constraints to leisure participation significantly moderated the association between leisure participation and feelings of loneliness. Leisure participation can enhance the wellbeing of children and youth through perceived social affiliation, and accessibility of and constraints to leisure opportunities moderate the relationship between leisure participation and perceived affiliation, thereby affecting overall wellbeing. Leisure service providers can ensure children have access to community recreation facilities and help them navigate perceived barriers that inhibit their participation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLoisir et Société / Society and LeisureSame topicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness ManagementFrench-language works237,207