MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045285320 · doi:10.1080/10413200600944140

The Relationship of Skill Level and Age to the Use of Imagery by Golfers

2006· article· en· W2045285320 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Sport Psychology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCognitionArousalMental imageMultilevel modelDevelopmental psychologyCognitive skillCognitive psychologySocial psychologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the present study was to examine the relationship of an objective measure of skill level, golf handicap, and age to the use of imagery. Five different functions of imagery were assessed through the Sport Imagery Questionnaire: cognitive specific, cognitive general, motivational specific, motivational general-arousal, and motivational general-mastery. Pearson correlations indicated handicap was significantly related to all five functions of imagery, while age was significantly related to the cognitive specific, cognitive general, and motivational general-mastery functions. As handicap decreased there was a corresponding increase in imagery use. As age increased there was a corresponding decrease in imagery use. Five hierarchical regressions were performed and handicap predicted the use of all five functions of imagery. The addition of age to the regression equations significantly added to the prediction of the cognitive functions of imagery use. Also, the interaction between handicap and age had a significant effect on the use of motivational general-mastery imagery.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.339
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