Evaluating the effectiveness of a skill building intervention in competitive athletes with developmental delays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sport has been used as a means to provide opportunities for the (re)-integration of marginalized persons into society (Elling & Knoppers, 2005), highlighting the importance of designing appropriate sporting environments to aid in the development of life skills among persons with developmental delays (DD). The purpose of the current study was to examine behaviour patterns before, during, and following the implementation of a four week skill building training (SBT) package which targeted mental and social skills, among four Special Olympic track and field athletes with DD. The SBT package focused on improving adaptive behaviours (positive self talk, leadership skills, focus and task involvement) and decrease maladaptive behaviours (negative self talk and off task behaviours). Data was collected through mixed methods including frequency of observed behaviours, researcher field notes, and athlete interviews. Overall, the SBT was effective for all athletes. Specifically, athletes showed improvements and greater consistency in the adaptive behaviours of focus, task involvement, positive self talk, and leadership qualities, as well as a decrease in negative self-talk patterns and off task behaviours during the intervention phase when compared to baseline; however, long-term effectiveness varied depending on the targeted behaviour and the athlete. Findings are discussed within the context of Bandura's Social Learning Theory, and directions for future investigation are explored.
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 | 0.004 | 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 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".