School activity participation and sense of belonging among U.S. college students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To determine whether activity participation is associated with a greater sense of belonging among U.S. college students. Participants: Cross-sectional survey data from the 2023–2024 Healthy Minds Study (n = 27,965 students [148 institutions]). Methods: Students reported participation in 18 activities, which were grouped into four categories: academic/major, athletic/dance, service/identity, and social. Participation was assessed by any activity, activity type, category, and number of activity categories (diversity). Belonging scores were compared between participants and non-participants and across subgroups for three student characteristics: gender identity, race and ethnicity, and first-generation status. Results: Belonging scores were significantly (p < .001) higher for participants than non-participants for any activity, 16 of 18 activity types, all activity categories, and with greater activity diversity. Activity participation was positively associated with belonging across all student subgroups (p < .005). Conclusions: Activity participation was associated with greater belonging across a range of activity types and categories and with greater activity diversity.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".