Relationships between changes in harmonious and obsessive passion, burnout, and goal attainment in collegiate athletes: The mediating role of coping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research examined the relationship between types of passion and burnout and goal attainment in sport, and assessed if coping mediated these relationships. College- and university-level volleyball players (N =239; female n = 126) participated in a prospective observational study involving two time points approximately 3 months apart. Residualized change scores were used to assess the relationships between changes in the measured variables. Results revealed that change in burnout was negatively associated with change in task-oriented coping and positively associated with changes in distraction- and disengagement-oriented coping. Change in goal attainment was positively associated with change in task-oriented coping and negatively associated with change in disengagement-oriented coping. Change in harmonious passion was negatively associated with change in burnout, and this relationship was mediated by distraction- and disengagement-oriented coping. Change in obsessive passion was positively associated with change in burnout, and this relationship was mediated by change in disengagement-oriented coping. Change in harmonious passion was also positively associated with change in goal attainment, and this relationship was mediated by both changes in task- and disengagement-oriented coping. Overall, these results highlight the role of coping in the relationships between types of passion and both burnout and goal attainment in sport.Acknowledgments: Supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".