MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332069989 · doi:10.1515/jirspa-2014-0008

Examining Developmental Differences in Imagery Use with Youth Soccer Players

2015· article· en· W2332069989 on OpenAlexaff
Melanie Gregg, Leisha Strachan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical Activity · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAthletesPsychologyYouth sportsDevelopmental psychologyApplied psychologyPhysical therapyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Emerging research on youth sport participants has revealed that young athletes use sport-related mental imagery for a variety of purposes such as acquiring sport-specific skills. The present study aimed to replicate previous research regarding developmental differences in imagery use, confirm the utility of the Sport Imagery Questionnaire-Children’s Version (SIQ-C), and clarify the relationship of gender to imagery use in youth sport. Youth soccer players ( N = 207) included boys and girls ranging in age from 7 to 16 years. All participants completed the SIQ-C. Results replicated previous research indicating the SIQ-C is a suitable tool for examining imagery use by youth sport participants. Developmental differences similar to previous research were also replicated; younger age cohorts were more likely to use motivational-specific (goal-oriented) images. No gender differences in imagery use materialized; recruiting participants from a single sport allowed direct comparisons between genders and eliminated the confounding variable of sport type.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.313
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.110 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical ActivitySame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207