MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170165793 · doi:10.1123/jsep.2014-0251

Development of Burnout Perceptions During Adolescence Among High-Level Athletes: A Developmental and Gendered Perspective

2014· article· en· W2170165793 on OpenAlexaff
Sandrine Isoard‐Gautheur, Emma Guillet‐Descas, Patrick Gaudreau, Julien Chanal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sport and Exercise Psychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAthletesBurnoutPerspective (graphical)Developmental psychologyPerceptionLongitudinal studyClinical psychologyMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined (a) the developmental trajectories of athlete burnout perceptions, (b) the gender differences on these trajectories, and (c) the interactions in the developmental trajectories of the three burnout dimensions. A five-wave longitudinal study was conducted with 895 athletes (47.6% female; Mage = .67). Results of multilevel growth models revealed that during adolescence, "reduced sense of accomplishment" linearly decreased and was higher for girls than boys. Moreover, "emotional/physical exhaustion" increased then decreased, and seemed to have been attenuated at time points in which athletes also had higher levels of "sport devaluation." Finally, "sport devaluation" increased over time with higher increases for girls than boys. Results of our study depicted the general and the gendered shape of the trajectory of burnout perceptions during adolescence, and underlined the advantages of considering the multifaceted nature of burnout to enable a deeper examination of the within-person synergies in the development of the three dimensions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations123
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sport and Exercise PsychologySame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207