MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021381609 · doi:10.1080/10413201003795485

Sport Psychology Consultants as Agents of Child Protection

2010· article· en· W2021381609 on OpenAlexaff
Ashley Stirling, Gretchen Kerr

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Sport Psychology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of GlasgowAssociation for Applied Sport Psychology
KeywordsPsychologyCategorizationSport psychologyApplied psychologyMeaning (existential)Identification (biology)Social psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to assess the experiences and perceived knowledge base of sport psychology consultants (SPCs) with respect to issues of child protection. A mixed-method research design was employed: 75 SPCs completed an online questionnaire, and 8 expert SPCs participated in semi-structured interviews. Data gleaned from the questionnaire were analyzed descriptively, and interview data were analyzed through the identification and categorization of meaning units. Findings of this study suggest that SPCs are in a position to act as agents of child protection in sport. Limitations of the study are reviewed and future recommendations 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.281
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Sport PsychologySame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207