MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026679340 · doi:10.1080/02640414.2013.794949

Acculturation in elite sport: a thematic analysis of immigrant athletes and coaches

2013· article· en· W2026679340 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert J. Schinke, Kerry R. McGannon, Randy C. Battochio, Greg D. Wells

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sports Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcculturationThematic analysisAthletesImmigrationContext (archaeology)ElitePsychologyFocus groupElite athletesSocial psychologyApplied psychologyQualitative researchSociologyMedicinePolitical sciencePhysical therapySocial scienceGeographyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To identify key issues concerning the acculturation of immigrant athletes in sport psychology, a thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) was conducted on focus group interview data from immigrant elite athletes relocated to Canada (n = 13) and coaches working with such athletes (n = 10). Two central themes were identified: (a) navigating two world views which referred to acculturation as a fluid process where athletes navigated between cultural norms of the home community and the host community, and (b) acculturation loads, which referred to whether immigrants and those in the host country shared acculturation (i.e., acculturation as a two-way process) or managed the load with or without support from others (i.e., acculturation as one-directional). Each of these central themes comprised sub-themes, which provided further insight into the experiences of acculturation for immigrant elite athletes. From the project, the authors recommend further research utilising case studies to provide a holistic description of the acculturation process from the vantage of various people within the sport context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.268 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations111
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sports SciencesSame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207