Dimensões motivacionais de basquetebolistas infanto-juvenis: um estudo segundo o sexo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This research aims to describe and compare the average rates obtained from the assessment of six motivational dimensions controlled by variable sex: Stress’ Control, Health, Sociability, Competitiveness, Aesthetic and Pleasure. Accordingly, a sample of 441 youthful basketball players of both sexes and ages ranging from 13 to 16 years, answered the “Inventário de Motivação à Prática Regular de Atividade Física e/ou Esporte” (IMPRAFE-54). Results indicated, regardless of gender in analysis, the Pleasure is the motivation’ dimension that motivates the most this athletes. Still, the only two dimensions that showed significant differences (p < .05), when sex is controlled, is Competitiveness and Aesthetics. One of the main conclusions is: the boys seem to be more motivated by competition and the girls by the feeling of belonging to a group. New studies must deepen these results, searching to try to explain a cultural explanation for this difference. Key words: Basketball; Youthful athletes. Motivation. Sex. Comparative Study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".