Athletes’ Broad Dimensions of Dispositional Perfectionism: Examining Changes in Life Satisfaction and the Mediating Role of Sport-Related Motivation and Coping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the associations of dispositional perfectionism, contextual motivation, sport-related coping, goal attainment, and changes in life satisfaction during a sport competition. A sample of 186 athletes completed measures of dispositional perfectionism, contextual motivation, and life satisfaction at Time 1 (before a competition) as well as measures of coping, goal attainment, and life satisfaction at Time 2 (after a competition). Results of structural equation modeling supported a model in which self-determined and non-self-determined motivation partially mediated the relationships between different dimensions of perfectionism and coping. It was also shown that disengagement-oriented coping mediated the negative relationship between evaluative concerns perfectionism and change in life satisfaction. In a similar way, goal attainment mediated the relationships of both task- and disengagement-oriented coping with change in life satisfaction. For the most part, these results are consistent with the motivational properties of evaluative concerns and personal standards perfectionism and with literature regarding coping and self-determination theory.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".