A proposed theoretical model to explain relative age effects in sport
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
Exemplary scientific methods describe concepts and provide theories for further testing. For the field of relative age effects (RAEs) in sport, the scientific method appears to be limited to description. The purpose of this paper is to provide a theoretical model to explain RAEs in sport, which researchers can use to test the effects, as well as to generate new hypotheses and recommendations. Herein, we argue that social agents have the largest influence on RAEs. Specifically, we propose that parents influence RAEs through Matthew effects, coaches influence RAEs through Pygmalion effects and athletes influence RAEs through Galatea effects. Integrating these three theories, we propose a model that explains RAEs through these various social agents. This paper provides a theoretical foundation from which researchers can further understand, explain and eventually use to create policies aimed at limiting the negative effect of relative age in sport.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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