Exploring coaches’ perceptions of an exemplary recreational youth basketball program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: A growing body of research has studied sport as a vehicle for positive youth development (PYD). While much of this research has investigated the developmental outcomes associated with sport participation, less is known about the mechanisms through which PYD occurs in a sport context. Further, much of the research on PYD in sport has studied competitive sport settings, while comparatively less is known about recreational sport. Aims: This qualitative descriptive study explored coaches’ perceptions of a successful recreational community youth basketball league. Specifically, this study aimed to describe coaches’ perceptions of the structure of the league, the developmental outcomes associated with youth’s participation in this sport program, as well as the mechanisms through which these outcomes are realized. Participants: A total of 12 volunteer basketball coaches (6 males and 6 females) were purposefully selected to participate in this study. The coaches were between 16 and 59 years old, had an average of 10.1 years of coaching experience, and 6 of the coaches previously played in the league in their youth. Data collection: Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with each basketball coach. Data analysis: The interviews were transcribed verbatim and subjected to a thematic analysis that was driven by both the data and extant PYD conceptual frameworks. Findings: Identified themes were integrated into an existing PYD conceptual framework. These themes related to immediate (e.g. enjoyment), short-term (e.g. competence, confidence, connection, and character), and long-term developmental outcomes (e.g. contribution), as well as social and contextual processes (e.g. activities, social relationships, and settings) which underpin these outcomes. Conclusion: This study extended the current body of research on PYD in sport through emphasizing the importance of ensuring that youth have enjoyable, positive immediate experiences in sport, and that accumulated positive experiences result, over time, in lasting effects on athletes’ development.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".