MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Relative Age Effect in Canadian University Women's Ice Hockey

2010· article· en· W2036311844 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christina A. Geithner, Michael R. Bracko

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce hockeyDemographySprintDashQuartileAnthropometryAthletesPsychologyMedicinePhysical therapyConfidence intervalPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relative age effect (RAE) or potential cognitive and biological variability among individuals in the same age-grouped cohort (Baxter-Jones et al., 1994; Much and Grondin, 2001) has been observed in sport as an association between being born earlier in the selection year and greater achievement and greater likelihood of becoming an elite athlete. The RAE has been found to exist in a variety of male sports including male ice hockey, but has not been examined with regard to female ice hockey. PURPOSE: To determine if the RAE is present in Canadian women's ice hockey. METHODS: Members of the University of Alberta women's ice hockey team (n=88 players, age=21.2±2.7 yrs, 1999-2008 seasons) were interviewed for date of birth, which was coded for each player by birth quartile: Q1=Jan-Mar, Q2=Apr-Jun, Q3=Jul-Sep, or Q4=Oct-Dec. Players completed an anthropometric battery; on-ice skating performance tests: 44.80 m speed, 6.10 m acceleration, cornering S-turn agility, and Modified Repeat Sprint Skate (MRSS), and off-ice fitness tests: 40 yd dash, vertical jump, push-ups, sit-ups, and the Leger test (to estimate VO2max). MANOVAs (SPSS, Windows Version 17.0) were run to determine if there were significant differences (p<0.05) by relative age. Players' birth date quartile and ranking status by Canadian Interuniversity Sport (CIS) and Canada West (CW) for 2004-2008 pre-seasons (ranked/not ranked, n=120) were submitted to Chi square analyses to determine if the RAE was present in birth date distribution and ranking status. RESULTS: Players born in Q1 were significantly faster on speed, acceleration, agility, and MRSS tests and performed more push-ups (p<0.05) than those born in Q4. A significant RAE was found for birth date distribution (C2=703.826, p=0.000); however, there were no significant differences between players with CIS or CW rankings and those who were not ranked by relative age (C2=2.152, p=0.541, and C2=2.052, p=0.562; respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The RAE was apparent in birth date distribution in women's ice hockey over a five-year period, consistent with that found in male ice hockey, and as evidenced by significant differences in skating performance and one fitness measure. CIS and CW rankings did not differ by relative age, possibly due to similar levels of game performance among elite-level players.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicSports Performance and Training→French-language works237,207→