Mental toughness, mental skills, and hardiness in team and individual 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
Background: Superior sport performance has been attributed to a variety of factors including mental toughness, mental skills, and hardiness (Gould, Dieffenbach, & Moffett, 2002). However, it has been suggested that these factors may vary between participants in different types of sport (Nicholls, Polman, Levy, & Backhouse, 2009). Research Design: Cross-sectional survey design. Participants: 159 varsity and club athletes from ages 18-33 (M= 20.23 SD = 2.05) were recruited from multiple sports. Measures: Test of Performance Strategies (TOPS) measured mental skills. The Sport Mental Toughness Questionnaire (SMTQ) measured mental toughness. The Dispositional Resilience Scale (DRS-15) measured hardiness. Procedures: Independent t-tests were conducted to assess the difference between team and individual athletes on mental skills, mental toughness, and hardiness subscales found in their respective questionnaires. Results: On the TOPS, significant differences were found between team and individual sport athletes on practice activation (p=0.018), practice relaxation (p=0.004), competition activation (p
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) | 0.000 | 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