When “where” is more important than “when”: Birthplace and birthdate effects on the achievement of sporting expertise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we assessed whether contextual factors related to where or when an athlete is born influence their likelihood of playing professional sport. The birthplace and birth month of all American players in the National Hockey League, National Basketball Association, Major League Baseball, and Professional Golfer's Association, and all Canadian players in the National Hockey League were collected from official websites. Monte Carlo simulations were used to verify if the birthplace of these professional athletes deviated in any systematic way from the official census population distribution, and chi-square analyses were conducted to determine whether the players' birth months were evenly distributed throughout the year. Results showed a birthplace bias towards smaller cities, with professional athletes being over-represented in cities of less than 500,000 and under-represented in cities of 500,000 and over. A birth month/relative age effect (in the form of a distinct bias towards elite athletes being relatively older than their peers) was found for hockey and baseball but not for basketball and golf. Comparative analyses suggested that contextual factors associated with place of birth contribute more influentially to the achievement of an elite level of sport performance than does relative age and that these factors are essentially independent in their influences on expertise 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".