MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135982238 · doi:10.1123/jsep.23.2.136

Development and Validation of the Coping Function Questionnaire for Adolescents in Sport

2001· article· en· W2135982238 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sport and Exercise Psychology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCoping (psychology)Measurement invarianceConvergent validityConfirmatory factor analysisClinical psychologyCoping behaviorDevelopmental psychologyPsychometricsStructural equation modelingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two studies reported the development and validation of the Coping Function Questionnaire (CFQ) for adolescent sport participants. The purpose of the first study was to develop the CFQ and conduct preliminary item and scale analyses. The result was an 18-item CFQ, which assessed problem-focused, emotion-focused, and avoidance coping function. In the second study, confirmatory factor analysis with data from 344 male and 339 female adolescent sport participants showed the CFQ measurement model to be acceptable for both genders. Simultaneous group analysis demonstrated gender invariance for the CFQ measurement model. Convergent and divergent validity was supported by correlations between the CFQ and select coping scales from the COPE, the sport-modified COPE, and Life Situations Inventory. The CFQ appears to be a promising step toward measurement of coping function in adolescent sport samples.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.295 · 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