MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160049396 · doi:10.1123/jis.6.2.147

An Examination of the Impact of Relative Age Effects and Academic Timing on Intercollegiate Athletics Participation in Women’s Softball

2013· article· en· W2160049396 on OpenAlex
Jess C. Dixon, Vincenzo Liburdi, Sean Horton, Patricia L. Weir

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 Intercollegiate Sport · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuartileAthletesContext (archaeology)DemographyPsychologyMedicineSociologyHistoryPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This investigation makes three noteworthy contributions to literature on the Relative Age Effect (RAE); 1) it adds to the small number of studies in women’s sports, 2) it is one of very few papers to examine the RAE in intercollegiate athletics, and 3) it (re-)introduces “academic timing” to the discussion of RAEs in this context. The 50 top-ranked NCAA Division I women’s softball teams at the conclusion of the 2011 season served as the focus for this investigation. Student-athletes were grouped into quartiles according to their birth date and identified as “on-time” or “academically delayed” based on their birth year and eligibility status. On-time student-athletes were over four times more likely to be born in quartile one than in quartile four, demonstrating a traditional RAE. This pattern was reversed for those who were academically delayed, with quartile four birth dates constituting more than half of the entire sample.

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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.341 · 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