Assessing practice-based influences on adolescent psychosocial development in sport: the activity context in youth sport questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to provide initial evidence of validity and reliability of scores derived from the Activity Context in Youth Sport Questionnaire (ACYSQ), an instrument designed to offer a comprehensive assessment of the activities adolescents take part in during sport practices. Two studies were designed for the purposes of item development and selection, and to provide evidence of structural and criterion validity of ACYSQ scores, respectively (N = 334; M age = 14.93, SD = 1.76 years). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) supported the adequacy of a 20-item ACYSQ measurement model, which was invariant across gender, and comprised the following dimensions: (1) stimulation; (2) usefulness-value; (3) authenticity; (4) repetition-boredom; and (5) ineffectiveness. Internal consistency reliability estimates and composite reliability estimates for ACYSQ subscale scores ranged from 0.72 to 0.91. In regression analyses, stimulation predicted enjoyment and perceived competence, ineffectiveness was significantly associated with perceived competence and authenticity emerged as a predictor of commitment in sport. These findings indicate that the ACYSQ displays adequate psychometric properties and the use of the instrument may be useful for studying selected activity-based features of the practice environment and their motivational consequences in youth sport.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".