Toward a Grounded Theory of the Psychosocial Competencies and Environmental Conditions Associated with Soccer Success
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purposes of this study were to identify and examine psychosocial competencies among elite male adolescent soccer players in order to present a grounded theory of factors associated with soccer success. Participants (N = 40) were 20 Canadian international youth soccer players (M age = 16.8 years), 14 English professional youth soccer players (M age = 16.2 years), and 6 English professional coaches. Using grounded theory methodology (Strauss & Corbin, 1998 Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. 1998. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, Newbury Park, CA: Sage. (2nd ed.) [Google Scholar]), data analysis followed several coding procedures geared toward theory development. Four major psychosocial competencies that appear to be central to success in elite youth soccer emerged from the data. The competencies were labeled Discipline (i.e., conforming dedication to the sport and a willingness to sacrifice), Commitment (i.e., strong motives and career planning goals), Resilience (i.e., the ability to use coping strategies to overcome obstacles), and Social Support (i.e., the ability to use emotional, informational, and tangible support). These results are compared to existing sport talent development research and a grounded theory of the psychosocial competencies and environmental conditions associated with becoming a professional soccer player is presented. Research and practical implications arising from this exploratory theory are discussed.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.026 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".