An Investigation of a Highly Successful Team Environment: The Case of the Male French National Whitewater Slalom Single Canoe and Kayak Team
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To date, most of the research on group cohesion has focused on team sports, with little known about how this body of knowledge relates to individual sports. The case of the male French whitewater slalom canoe and kayak team was chosen because of the success of the team at World Championships and Olympic Games. The purpose of the present case study was to investigate how the coaches and athletes of this highly successful team worked together in training and competition within a highly competitive environment. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with six athletes and four coaches. Three themes, each containing numerous sub-themes, emerged from the analysis: (a) the nature of collaboration within the team environment, (b) coach leadership, and (c) the fragility of collaboration. The results of the present study have advanced our understanding of what collaboration within an individual sport team may look like. For a period of time, the leadership skills of the coaches, as well as their technical coaching expertise, and the willingness of the talented and driven athletes to work together, contributed significantly to a collaborative environment for this team. Then a change in the Olympic entry rules, the departure of an influential coach, and the inevitable change in the ages and experiences of the athletes themselves all combined to erode the foundation of that productive and collaborative environment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".