Effects of participation in extracurricular activities on psychological development for university students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine how participation in extracurricular activities affects psychological development in a sample of university students. Longitudinal data from the Student Lifestyle and Development Survey were analyzed. The sample consisted of 351 university students from the University of Guelph. The participants completed questionnaires measuring variables such as hours spent in extracurricular activities, identity development, academic self-concept, and self acceptance in their first, second, and third years of university. Regression analysis was used to determine the effects that participation in sports, clubs, and volunteer work has on psychological development. Gender differences were also analyzed. Participation in sports was related to higher moratorium scores for males, but lower self-acceptance for females. Participation in clubs seemed to facilitate identity development for both males and females and was related to increased academic self-concept for females. Volunteerism during the first year of university predicted less advanced identity development for both genders and lower self-acceptance for males. However, volunteerism during second and third years was related to more advanced identity development as well as higher academic self-concept for females.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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".