MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978984779 · doi:10.1080/10413200.2011.607486

Team Attributions in Sport: A Meta-Analysis

2012· article· en· W1978984779 on OpenAlexaff
Luc J. Martin, Albert V. Carron

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Sport Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLuckPsychologyAttributionMeta-analysisDimension (graph theory)Applied psychologyTask (project management)Team sportSocial psychologyScale (ratio)Cognitive psychologyAthletesManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the study was to determine (via meta-analysis) whether team-oriented attributions in sport are team-serving. Analyses were carried out with 21 studies containing 99 effect sizes. The results indicated (a) the presence of a team-serving bias, (b) no temporal change in the pattern of results from studies using operational definitions based on Weiner's theoretical model, and (c) significant differences (p < .05) between the internal composite dimension (i.e., ability/effort versus task difficulty/luck) advanced by Weiner (1985) and the internal dimensions developed by Greenlees et al. (2005; Causal Dimension Scale for Teams). This study documents the continued presence of the team-serving bias.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Sport PsychologySame topicMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsFrench-language works237,207