A reversal theory perspective on the motivational states of soccer players in Canada, Germany, and Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This descriptive, exploratory study used a reversal theory framework to examine the in-event motivational states of 179 intercollegiate soccer players in Canada, Germany, and Japan. Information was also gathered on players’ thoughts about the university soccer environment. The results suggest that all of the participants were oriented toward the mastery (strength, control) and conformity motivational states while playing. In addition, Japanese players reported the strongest endorsement of the telic (serious) state, and they were more sympathetic and alloic (concerned with others’ outcomes) than the Canadian and German cohorts. With respect to the salience of these motivational states, Canadian players were most aware of the mastery orientation. In Japan it was the telic state that was most dominant, and in Germany it was spread out between the alloic, autic (concern about own outcomes), and mastery states. Other findings, obtained through content analysis, revealed that university soccer in Canada and Japan fosters both a social and performance-focused atmosphere, while in Germany it is perceived as more social and recreational than in the other two countries. These results provide a preliminary foundation for follow-up cross-cultural work. Future research should also examine the motivational states of more elite players (including those in Brazil) and the correlation of these states with winning and losing over time.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".