Following in their footsteps? Sport expertise and parental participation in sport and physical activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The family has been identified as a critical influence on sport expertise development, with much of the research in this area focusing on the provision of resources and the changing roles of the family throughout athletes' careers. Although associations between parent's and children's participation in physical activity have been explored, little is known about the associations between parent participation in sport and physical activity and the development of sport expertise. As part of a larger investigation of sport expertise development, patterns of participation in sport and physical activity were examined for the parents of 229 athletes from Australia and Canada (mean age = 23.28 ± 4.79) via completion of the Developmental History of Athletes Questionnaire. Athletes represented 36 different sports and three skill levels - non elite, pre elite, and elite. Pearson chi-square tests for independence revealed significant associations between skill level and parental involvement in general fitness activities, recreational sport, and competitive sport, with parents of elite athletes participating in these activities more regularly than parents of non elite athletes. Specifically, involvement of the mother in general fitness activities and recreational sport, and involvement of the father in competitive sport were most strongly associated with athlete skill level. Additionally, parents of elite athletes were also more likely to have competed at the elite levels of competition themselves (Ï ‡ 2(6) = 17.04, p < .01), but not necessarily in the same sport as their child. These results support previous research highlighting the importance of the family for the development of sport expertise, and extend current knowledge in this area by suggesting that parent modelling of physical activity behaviours and parent participation in high performance sport may influence athlete development.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".