Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the perceived impact of team sport participation on the development of future life skills. Thirty-two participants ranging in age from 18-25 consented to participate in the quantitative study. Each of the participants completed an online survey through Fluid Surveys, a secure online software program approved for use in Canadian universities. The data was entered into SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) for analysis. The data revealed that positive correlations were seen in all of the four categories tests (effective communication, ability to deal with pressure, ability to work collaboratively, and development of a strong work ethic). The research showed that females rated higher than males in their perception of team sports had aiding in their ability to work through stress situations and work collaboratively as a team. Alternatively, male participants rater high than females on teams sports effect on work ethic, ability to deal with pressure, and effect on social skills. The relationships of the number of teams played on and the participant’s ability to deal with pressure and handle anxiety was the more significant trend found. As the number of teams played on increased, the perceived ability to deal with anxious situations also increased. Trends towards significance were depicted in the responses for ability to communicate effectively and work collaboratively as a team as the number of teams participated on increased. The results highlight the importance of athletic programs to ensure that core values and mission statements are formed in line with the reliable data and research.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".