The influence of contextual features on the nature of high school athletes' developmental experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research has demonstrated that youth can benefit in numerous ways from their participation in high school sport, but that negative outcomes can also occur and undesirably impact their development. Although research in this area has been conducted under the umbrella term high school sport, few studies have deliberately examined the contextual features of where high school sport participation occurred. The purpose of this study was to examine former high school athletes’ perspectives on how the context in which high school sports were practiced influenced their developmental experiences. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 individuals (10 males, 12 females) between 18 and 56 years of age. Findings from an inductive thematic analysis revealed how practicing high school sport in an urban setting compared to a rural setting can significantly influence the nature of participants’ developmental experiences. For example, participants in rural settings discussed how most sports were only offered in an organized manner in high schools and, as such, high school sport was often the highest competitive level available. In contrast, for many participants in urban settings, high school sports were practiced concurrently with club sports. Participants involved in both sporting contexts discussed how they perceived high school sport as more recreational and club sports as more competitive. Overall, the findings from the current study add to the literature by illustrating how community size and geographical location represent important variables that can influence how competition level and personal effort are perceived by the participants. The findings add further support to the notion that sport is not a single entity and that future research efforts must consider contextual features to better explain the development that occurs through sport.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".