MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153258642 · doi:10.1177/0265407510378123

Relational efficacy beliefs and relationship quality within coach-athlete dyads

2010· article· en· W2153258642 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Jackson, Bob Grove, Mark R. Beauchamp

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social and Personal Relationships · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClosenessDyadPsychologyComplementarity (molecular biology)Social psychologyPerceptionPartner effectsAthletesQuality (philosophy)Self-efficacyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary purpose of this study was to examine the role of efficacy beliefs in predicting perceptions of relationship quality (i.e., closeness, commitment, and complementarity) within coach—athlete dyads. Data from 63 youth athletes and their coaches were analyzed using actor—partner interdependence models and revealed actor effects for self-efficacy on complementarity (for both dyad members) and closeness (for coaches only). A number of actor and partner effects emerged for other-efficacy and relation-inferred self-efficacy. However, the magnitude, and in some cases the direction, of these relationships were moderated by the person’s dyadic role. The findings are discussed with respect to interdependence in coach—athlete relationships.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

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

Citations78
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social and Personal RelationshipsSame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207