Effects of a season‐long PST program on gymnastic performance and on psychological skill development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Findings are reported of an evaluation of the effects of a 10‐month PST program on performance and psychological indicators. Ten nationally ranked female gymnasts (M = 12 years old) followed a psychological skills training (PST) program for half an hour per week. The five‐step intervention consisted of relaxation, self‐talk, goal setting, focusing, and visualization. Performance scores were obtained using scores and rankings during two consecutive competitive seasons. The OMSAT‐3 © was used to individually assess 11 psychological indicators (Durand‐Bush, 1995). Data were recorded before the intervention and after every step of the intervention, during the course of the competitive seasons. Repeated ANOVAs as well as a practical assessment of the data were completed. The PST program appeared to be most effective on imagery skills, relaxation, activation, focusing, and refocusing. On three events out of four (bars, beam, floor), the 10 gymnasts progressed 5% more than 11 other gymnasts who did not follow this PST program.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".