MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980893889 · doi:10.1260/174795407781394284

Factors That Influence Coaches' Use of Sound Coaching Practices

2007· article· en· W1980893889 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wendy M. Rodgers, Ian Reade, Craig Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Science & Coaching · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingPsychologyCertificationApplied psychologyCompetition (biology)AthletesEmpirical researchEmpirical evidenceMedical educationManagementPhysical therapyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research report is to explore factors that may influence whether coaches adopt desired behaviours. This research was conducted with a census survey of Canadian coaches who had completed all or part of their National Coaching Certification Program Competition-Introduction coach education. The results indicate that several factors may influence desired coaching behaviour. The factors include competitive experience as an athlete, hours of coaching per week, and whether the coaches are coaching individual or team sports. The results provide empirical evidence that factors beyond coach education probably influence whether coaches actually engage in sound coaching practice

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.298 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations30
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sports Science & CoachingSame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207