MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061362714 · doi:10.1080/19398440903192324

Parents' perspectives on the practice of high school sport in a Canadian context

2009· article· en· W2061362714 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Martin Camiré, Pierre Trudel, Tanya Forneris

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Research in Sport and Exercise · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsContext (archaeology)PsychologyPleasureAthletesPositive Youth DevelopmentQualitative researchIdeal (ethics)Developmental psychologyMedical educationMedicineSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although there are a number of studies that have examined youth development in organised activities, few have been conducted in sport‐specific contexts. The purpose of this study was to document parents' perspectives on the practice of high school sport in a Canadian context. A qualitative methodology was employed and 20 parents who had at least one child participating in high school sports were selected to participate in interviews. Results indicated that: (1) parents believed they emotionally, financially and/or logistically supported their children's high school sport participation and that an evolution occurred in their role as providers of supportive behaviours, (2) a large portion of parents believed high school sports should prioritise pleasure and participation but some parents acknowledged that competition becomes increasingly emphasised as athletes get older, (3) parents believed the ideal high school coach should be supportive, motivating and encouraging, and (4) parents believed high school sport participation promotes the acquisition of positive skills and attributes that benefit youth's physical, social and academic 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.

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)0.007
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.383 · 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

Citations30
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Research in Sport and ExerciseSame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207