A qualitative analysis of university athlete’s perceptions and negotiations of health and athletic participation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study explores student-athletes’ relationships with food and exercise, often referred to as eating and training thus unpacking how student-athletes come to understand health within the context of university sport. The unique nature of the study, with its focus on intercollegiate sport in Canada, contributes to the lack of knowledge about Canadian sport athletes’ experiences of sport, and it provides a qualitative lens to consider how student-athletes construct notions about the body, health and performance. Seventeen (eight female and nine male) student-athletes, from Memorial University 2010-2011 varsity roster participated in this study. Participants were representative of varsity sports offered at the university, including individual sports: cross-country running, swimming and wrestling; and team sports: basketball, soccer and volleyball. Data collection involved four focus group discussions and follow-up semi-structured interviews with four individual student-athletes. Using discourse analysis, informed by Foucault’s concepts of the panopticon and technologies of the self, data analysis exposed how cultures of sport not only shape student-athletes understandings of eating and training but also how sport normalizes and regulates specific (un)healthy ideas and practices.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".