The Ottawa Mental Skills Assessment Tool (OMSAT-3*)
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
The purpose of the present study was to assess the psychometric properties of the Ottawa Mental Skills Assessment Tool (OMSAT-3), an instrument developed to measure a broad range of mental skills (Salmela, 1992). The OMSAT-3 was administered to 335 athletes from 35 different sports. An initial first-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) revealed that the model displayed an inadequate fit, which led to the postulation of a more robust version, the OMSAT-3*. A CFA on this latter version, which included 48 items and 12 mental skill scales grouped under three broader conceptual components—foundation, psychosomatic, and cognitive skills—indicated that the proposed model fit well the data. A second-order CFA assessing the validity of the three broader conceptual components also yielded adequate indices of fit. The OMSAT-3* significantly discriminated between competitive and elite level athletes and its scales yielded acceptable internal consistency and temporal stability. Implications for consultants, coaches, and researchers are discussed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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