O papel mediador da autodeterminação sobre o efeito do perfeccionismo nas estratégias de enfrentamento em atletas juniores de futebol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies have shown associative relations between Perfectionism (Pe) and Coping (Co) constructs proving to be and up to date and important topic of interest. This study aimed at testing a model of predictive relations of Pe’s construct, Adjusted Perfectionism-Normal (PAN) and Maladaptive Perfectionist-Neurotic(PDN), on Co’s construct, Total Resources for Coping (RTC) mediated by Self-determination (IAD) with a sample of juvenile football players. Therefore, 182 male athletes with ages from 12 to 19 years (14,86±1,97) from a football team in the state of Paraná (Brazil) responded to the Sport motivation Scale (SMS-28), Athletic coping skills Inventory (ACSI-28) and Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS-33). The results from a Structural Equation Model,testes unmediated by IAD explained 35% of variance in RTC; while MEE, considering the mediation of IAD, explained 44% of variance in RTC presented by athletes. Available data confirm the theoretical hypotheses concerning the importance of intrinsec motivation in the relationship between perfeccionism and copin. We emphasize that new studies should explore most varied samples allowing a larger variability of answers and, consequently, improving the hypothetical-predictive relations tested.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".