The relative age effect in European professional soccer: Did ten years of research make any difference?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relative age effect (RAE) refers to an asymmetry in the birth-date distribution favouring players born early in the selection year and discriminating against participants born later in the year. While the RAE effect was initially reported in sport more than two decades ago, there have been few attempts to examine whether player selection strategies have changed over time in light of our improved understanding of the phenomenon. We compared the birth-date distributions of professional soccer players in ten European countries over a 10-year period involving the 2000-2001 and 2010-2011 competitive seasons, respectively. Chi-square goodness-of-fit tests were used to compare differences between the observed and expected birth-date distributions across selection years. Generally, results indicated no change in the RAE over the past 10 years in professional soccer, emphasizing the robust nature of this phenomenon. We propose a change in the structure of youth involvement in soccer to reduce the impact of the RAE on talent identification and selection.
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 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 | 0.016 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it