MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985610195 · doi:10.1177/1046496409340328

Examining the Influence of Team-Referent Causal Attributions and Team Performance on Collective Efficacy

2009· article· en· W1985610195 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSmall Group Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCollective efficacyAttributionReferentSocial psychologyMultilevel modelRecreationScale (ratio)CoachingApplied psychologyTeam sportAthletesPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the relationship between team-referent attributions, team performance, and collective efficacy beliefs in recreational sport teams. A total of 248 recreational volleyball players from 45 different coed teams participated in the study. Participants completed a subjective performance measure and the Causal Dimension Scale for Teams directly following a match and then completed the Collective Efficacy Questionnaire for Sports prior to their subsequent game. Using hierarchical linear modeling, it was found that both objective and subjective measures of performance positively predicted collective efficacy at the team level. In addition, stability negatively predicted collective efficacy beliefs; however, this relationship was moderated by objective performance.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.236 · 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