MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7131973168

MINDFULNESS AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY: PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES OF THE STATE MINDFULNESS SCALE FOR PHYSICAL ACTIVITY

2021· article· en· W7131973168 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nazmi Baykose, ÇAĞRI ARI, Gizem Ceylan

Bibliographic record

VenueDSpace@MŞU · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindfulnessTurkishConfirmatory factor analysisScale (ratio)Physical activityReliability (semiconductor)ValidityPsychometrics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to test the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the State Mindfulness Scale for Physical Activity developed by Cox, Ullrich-French, and French(1). The research group consists of individuals who study in dance courses in the Cankaya district of Ankara. A total of 217 individuals, 53.5% female (n=116), 46.5% male (n=101), participated in the study voluntarily. The average age of the individuals participating in the study was determined as 31.42 +/- 8.93. n addition, the participants stated that they had continued their dance activities for an average of 4.60 +/- 5.14 years. Data obtained from the research; a) Personal Information Form prepared by the researchers, b) State Mindfulness Scale for Physical Activity developed by Cox, Ullrich-French and French(1), and c) Lau et al. (2) and adapted to Turkish by Sahin and Kokdemir(3) using the Toronto Mindfulness Scale. The validity of the mindfulness scale for physical activity was examined by confirmatory factor analysis and concurrent validity. The findings showed that the Turkish adaptation of the state mindfulness scale for physical activity had good psychometric properties to determine physical activity participants' state mindfulness.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.820

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDSpace@MŞUSame topicMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFrench-language works237,207