Understanding sport dropout: Exploring the experiences of adolescent girls with body image concerns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In adolescence, girls report lower perceptions of sport enjoyment and commitment, and are more likely to withdraw from sport compared to boys. Recent findings with adolescent girls suggest that negative body-related emotions may predict the gender disparity in sport. Specifically, greater body-related shame, guilt, and envy, and lower pride are related to lower sport enjoyment and commitment. As the extant literature focuses on the sport experiences of female athletes, the body-related experiences of girls who withdraw from sport are not well understood. The present study purposefully sampled adolescent girls (N = 12) who withdrew from sport for body and weight-related reasons and utilized individual semi-structured interviews to explore girls' sport experiences and disengagement. A thematic analysis was used to analyze the data, whereby seven main themes emerged. Girls described a culture of "body talk" that was normative; how body-consciousness leads to compensatory behaviours (i.e., dieting, exercise, covering up); how sport promotes appearance and fitness-related social comparisons; the differential presentations of body-consciousness in social vs. sport contexts; how negative evaluations of appearance influence perceptions of competence in sport; the detrimental nature of evaluation and competition in sport; and how enjoyment of sport is impacted by social influences in and out of sport context. Overall, negative body-related experiences in sport were key contributors to disengagement and providers of support (e.g., coaches, teammates) contributed to experiences of body consciousness. Strategies to improve sport outcomes for adolescent girls should focus on reducing negative body-related emotions and targeting negative weight-related commentary.Acknowledgments: This study was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".