Sport participation and positive development in older persons
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In many Western countries, more and more people are living longer. As part of this demographic shift, increasing numbers are participating in Masters sport. In the past, sport was considered important for the development of young people; however, the potential for sport participation to affect positive development across the lifespan is now recognized. The purpose of this paper is to introduce conceptual frameworks from developmental psychology that are being used to understand youths’ positive development through sport, and to explore these frameworks in the context of sport as an avenue for positive development in older persons. To achieve this aim, we outline research on sport participation as it applies to youth development and consider relevant aspects as they broadly apply to development later in life. This discussion highlights the inherent paradox of sport participation—that it has the potential to provide considerable positive growth but also the potential for significant negative consequences. Finally, we explore areas of future research related to positive development in older persons through 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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it