MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2211125321 · doi:10.2174/1874350101508010203

Now Hear This: Auditory Sense may be an Undervalued Component of Effective Modeling and Imagery Interventions in Sport

2015· article· en· W2211125321 on OpenAlexaff
O Jenny, Barbi Law, Amanda M. Rymal

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open Psychology Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyConstruct (python library)Cognitive psychologyMotor imageryComponent (thermodynamics)Auditory imageryConsistency (knowledge bases)Mental imagePsychological interventionSport psychologyAthletesPsychological researchCognitive scienceCognitionApplied psychologySocial psychologyElectroencephalographyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceBrain–computer interface

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most important goals of behavioral research in sport psychology and motor learning is to increase our understanding of how to more effectively manipulate structural elements of psychological skills so as to optimize learning and performance. Imagery and modeling research have long-held parallel trajectories; advancements in the understanding of one construct has often informed subsequent research on the other. Preliminary research examining the effect of auditory modeling has indicated that deliberate manipulation of sounds employed during modeled actions can positively impact motor skill learning, performance, and consistency. The imagery research has yet to directly examine the auditory sense, and thus examination of this imagery component would represent a meaningful contribution to our understanding of how to further optimize athletes’ imagery practice. The current paper reviews current knowledge regarding effective imagery and modeling structure, and provides theoretical and evidence-based rationales for the examination of the auditory sense in imagery research.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open Psychology JournalSame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207