Variations in relative age effects in individual sports: Skiing, figure skating and gymnastics
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
In many sports, policy-makers and administrators employ annual cohorts to reduce differences between athletes during childhood and youth. Although well-intended, unintended relative age effects (RAEs) usually occur. RAEs refer to the specific selection, participation and attainment disadvantages associated with participants' birthdates relative to an arbitrary 'cutoff' date used to group participants within annual age groups. To date, we have little understanding of RAEs in individual sports. In this article, Study 1 considered the presence of RAEs in 1474 ski jumping, 7501 cross-country skiing, 15,565 alpine skiing, 4179 snowboarders and 713 Nordic combined athletes. Chi-square analyses revealed significant RAEs for most of these contexts across sexes. In Study 2, RAEs in the aesthetic sports of figure skating (n=502) and female gymnastics (n=612) were considered. There was no effect for the figure skaters and an atypical effect for the gymnasts. The significant effects across most ski sports coupled with the null effects in figure skating and atypical effect in gymnastics suggest that sport-specific contextual factors are important elements in understanding the mechanisms of RAEs, although further work is necessary to validate these findings.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it