A season-long case study examining alcohol use and misuse in Canadian junior hockey
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
In Canada, hockey is part of the country’s history, culture and identity, but its practice is also linked with high rates of alcohol consumption. The purpose of the present study was to conduct a season-long case study examining alcohol use and misuse in Canadian junior hockey. Data were collected throughout the 2015–2016 season through extensive observations of a junior-level team as well as semi-structured interviews conducted at three time points (i.e. beginning, middle and end of season) with five team members (i.e. two coaches and three players). The findings showed how for the participants, socialisation to alcohol within hockey began at a very young age and the physical environment (e.g. the sale of alcohol in arenas) facilitated consumption. The findings also revealed how alcohol consumption was inherently planned within hockey-related events (e.g. out-of-town tournament), sometimes superseding hockey itself. Throughout the season, the team context represented a prime setting where players were prone to exhibit childish, health compromising and illegal behaviours while under the influence of alcohol.
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 | 0.028 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it