MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W118603499

Exploring the multiple dimensions of social support among elite female adolescent swimmers

2010· article· en· W118603499 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kristina A. Hassell, Catherine M. Sabiston, Gordon A. Bloom

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of sport psychology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElitePsychologySocial supportAthletesPerceptionElite athletesSocial psychologyPhenomenology (philosophy)Developmental psychologyPhysical therapy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

McGill University, CanadaThis study concurrently explored multiple dimensions of social support ofnine elite female adolescent swimmers. Data were collected and analyzed using theprinciples of constructivist phenomenology. Results highlighted the importance ofthe structural, functional, and perceptual social support dimensions on athletes’experiences in elite swimming in relation to their coaches, parents, and peers.Coaches were an important provider of almost every aspect of social support. Par-ents provided social support on a more general level, with their swimming-specificinformational support being the single most unappreciated aspect of social support.Teammatesprovidedasenseofaffiliationandsharedexperiencethatwasdescribedas the most positive aspect of their swimming involvement. The current qualitativefindings provide new insights into the concurrent structural, functional, and per-ceptual dimensions of social support in female youth elite sport.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.928

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations43
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of sport psychologySame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207