Quantification of the Relative Age Effect in Three Indices of Physical Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relative age effect (RAE) describes the relationship between an individual's birth month and their level of attainment in sports. There is a clustering of birth dates just after the cutoff used for selection in age-grouped sports, and it is hypothesized that such relatively older sportspeople may enjoy maturational and physical advantages over their younger peers. There is, however, little empirical evidence of any such advantage. This study investigated whether schoolchildren's physical performance differed according to which quarter of the school year they were born in. Mass, stature, body mass index, cardiorespiratory fitness, strength, and power were measured in 10 to 16 year olds (n = 8,550, 53% male). We expressed test performance as age- and sex-specific z-scores based on reference data with age rounded down to the nearest whole year and also as units normalized for body mass. We then compared these values between yearly birth quarters. There were no significant main effects for differences in anthropometric measures in either sex. Girls born in the first quarter of the school year were significantly stronger than those born at other times when handgrip was expressed as a z-score. As z-scores, all measures were significantly higher in boys born in either the first or second yearly quarters. Relative to body mass, cardiorespiratory fitness was higher in boys born in the first quarter and power was higher in those born in the second quarter. The RAE does not appear to significantly affect girls' performance test scores when they are expressed as z-score or relative to body mass. Boys born in the first and second quarters of the year had a significant physical advantage over their relatively younger peers. These findings have practical bearing if coaches use fitness tests for talent identification and team selection. Categorizing test performance based on rounded down values of whole-year age may disadvantage children born later in the selection year. These relatively younger children may be less to gain selection for teams or training programmes.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".