Coaches', parents', and peers' influence on the development and transfer of life skills learned through youth sport participation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Life skills development and transfer is a complex process influenced by multiple social agents. The purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of life skills adolescents may have learned through their participation in sport and the role social agents have in the attainment and transfer of life skills. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten athletes (8 female, 2 male, Mage = 16.1 years, SD = 0.58) who competed at a provincial level or higher, and the parent most involved in their sport participation (8 mothers, 2 fathers, Mage = 48.0 years, SD = 5.16). Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic approach. Results suggested that interpersonal life skills (e.g., respect, communication) and intrapersonal life skills (e.g., work ethic, responsibility) were developed through sport participation. These life skills were predominantly learned and transferred through implicit processes influenced by coaches, parents, and peers. Parents provided opportunities for their children to develop and practice certain life skills, and their values and expectations influenced the type of life skills they learned. Similarly, coaches' team values and expectations demonstrated through role-modelling, and positive coach-athlete relationships, influenced and reinforced life skills learning and transfer. The most common explicit strategy used by parents and coaches was direct conversations about life skills and transfer in various contexts. Peers also influenced life skills development and transfer through interactions that allowed athletes to practice life skills. Findings highlight the multiple processes, influences, and contexts through which life skills are learned, transferred, and practiced.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".