MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W22757877 · doi:10.1260/1747-9541.5.3.363

The Impact of Informal Coach Training on the Personal Development of Youth Sport Athletes

2010· article· en· W22757877 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Science & Coaching · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAthletesPsychologyPositive Youth DevelopmentApplied psychologyYouth sportsTraining (meteorology)Personal developmentMedical educationPhysical therapyDevelopmental psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of adults has been outlined as a critical aspect of positive development of young athletes. Youth-sport coaches interact constantly with athletes and hence have the potential to impact significantly on the experiences of youth. Formal coach training has been proposed as a method for helping coaches interact effectively with athletes, but research shows that many coaches learn through experience and interactions with other coaches. The purpose of this study was to determine if coach training offered through the sport program impacts positively on the personal development of youth. Results suggest that athletes who played for coaches that received training through their program reported higher rates of personal and social skills than athletes who played for untrained coaches. Implications for sport programs' administrators are discussed along with recommendations for incorporating positive development principles within a sport environment.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.819

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.296 · 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