MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147267491 · doi:10.1123/jsm.2013-0146

The Psychological Contract of Volunteer Youth Sport Coaches

2014· article· en· W2147267491 on OpenAlexaff
Alanna Harman, Alison Doherty

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sport Management · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingClubTransactional leadershipPsychologyRecreationPsychological contractApplied psychologyAthletesSocial psychologyPublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the psychological contract of volunteer youth sport coaches to determine the content, variation, and influences to its development. Interviews were conducted with 22 volunteer coaches of team sports, representing different levels of play (recreational, competitive), coaching tenure (novice, experienced), and gender (female, male), who were sampled to account for the potential variation based on these demographic factors. The findings revealed that volunteer coaches possessed both transactional and relational expectations of themselves and their club. Coaches’ most frequently cited expectations of themselves were technical expertise (transactional), and leadership (relational), while their most frequently cited expectations of the club were fundamental resources and club administration (transactional), and coach support (relational). Variation was found by different levels of play (recreational, competitive) and coaching tenure (novice, experienced). The coaches’ psychological contract was shaped predominately by sources external to the club. Implications for managing the psychological contract of volunteer youth sport coaches and directions for future research 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.003
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 score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sport ManagementSame topicNonprofit Sector and VolunteeringFrench-language works237,207