Media representations and athlete identities: Examining benefits for sport psychology
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
Although a small body of research in sport psychology has begun to study media representations, the analyses of media representations and athlete identities are on the margins of sport psychology. In this article we outline why the study of media representations and athletic identities is useful for sport psychology. The purpose is accomplished by centralising a social constructionist conception of identity to highlight why focusing on media representations expands understanding of identity and the psychological experiences, social behavioural and health consequences. These points are illustrated with examples from media research in sport psychology grounded in social constructionism (e.g., discursive psychology and cultural studies).We conclude that critical constructionist approaches focusing on media discourse/narratives, athlete identities and the psychological implications are useful because they further critical cultural sport psychology research. This ‘critical research agenda’ focuses on more nuanced examinations of the socio-cultural context of sport and athletic identities to expand possibilities for change, resistance and inclusion of multiple, fluid identities and positive health outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 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