A Deliberative Democratic Approach to Athlete-Centred Sport: The Dynamics of Administrative and Communicative Power
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article examines the sport policy process in realizing an athlete-centred sport system through the lens of deliberative democracy. We examine the development of an athlete-centred system largely in the context of Canadian high performance sport; however global aspects of this trend are recognized. Athlete-centred initiatives in light of Habermas's (1996) deliberative democracy theory's core concepts of administratively employed power and communicatively generated power are discussed. In particular, we demonstrate instances of communicative power's counter-steering capabilities of the state's use of administrative power. The tensions between administrative and communicative power illustrated through efforts towards establishing an athlete-centred system are also presented. We conclude by discussing the implications for the potential for a deliberative democratic approach in realizing an athlete-centred sport system and raise important issues about its development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it