MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334454874 · doi:10.1080/10413200.2016.1164764

Examining the Importance of Intentionally Structuring the Youth Sport Context to Facilitate Positive Youth Development

2016· article· en· W2334454874 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

VenueJournal of Applied Sport Psychology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPositive Youth DevelopmentPsychologyYouth sportsContext (archaeology)Applied psychologyQuality (philosophy)Medical educationDevelopmental psychologyAthletes

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researchers argue that sport must be deliberately structured to teach life skills. The purpose of this study was to examine differences in program quality and positive developmental outcomes across 3 youth programming contexts (intentional sport, nonintentional sport, intentional leadership) pertaining to the importance of intentionally teaching life skills. Researchers conducted 184 observations, and 377 youth completed 2 questionnaires. Results indicated intentionally structured programs scored higher on program quality and positive youth development outcomes than nonintentionally structured programs, with intentional sport scoring significantly higher on some measures of program quality and positive youth development than leadership programs. Practical implications and future research areas are discussed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.228 · 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