Mindfulness, psychological well-being and doping in talented young high-school athletes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary aim of this research was to determine how mindfulness and psychological well-being relate to the propensity to use Performance-Enhancing Drugs (PEDs) in a sample of talented young athletes. A secondary aim was to determine how mindfulness and psychological well-being are related. This was a survey study with a quantitative research approach. South African Academy athletes at a high performance centre and competitive high school athletes from four private high schools participated in the survey. In the survey, two validated questionnaires (Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire [FFMQ] and Ryff's Psychological Well-being Scale), and a self-constructed questionnaire to establish the propensity of athletes to use PEDs were employed. 346 athletes (208 boys, 138 girls) aged M=16.0, SD=1.4 years participated. There was a significant correlation (r=0.32, p=0.00) between overall mindfulness and psychological well-being as measured by the FFMQ and Ryff's Psychological Well-being Scale respectively. Two possible predictors of propensity to use PEDs were identified by means of logistic regression and cross tabulation. It is concluded that mindfulness and psychological well-being were inversely related to the propensity to use PEDs.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it