MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335762647 · doi:10.1177/0894845316635821

Intentions to Be an Athletic Director

2016· article· en· W2335762647 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 Career Development · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAthletic Training and Education
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMultivariate analysis of varianceSocial cognitive theorySocial psychologyAthletesMedical educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to evaluate senior athletic administrators’ expectations and intentions of becoming National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I athletic directors (ADs) and explore women and racial minority senior athletic administrators’ athletic workplace experience. To serve the purpose, two studies using social cognitive career theory (SCCT) were employed. First, demographic (i.e., gender and race) differences by SCCT variables were assessed through survey collection and multivariate analysis of variance. Second, content analysis of interviews was used to assess the experiences of athletic administrators. Results revealed women and racial minority senior athletic administrators’ had similar self-efficacy compared to White men, but they encountered more barriers, unfavorable outcome expectations, and lower choice goals associated with becoming an NCAA Division I AD. Further, findings show women and racial minority senior athletic administrators felt occupational segregation limited their access and opportunities for career advancement to a Division I AD position.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.426
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.238 · 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