Exploring the relationships between relative age, sport participation, education, and indicators of positive youth development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relative age describes the age differences within age groups in sport and education. Relative Age Effects (RAE) indicate that being older within an age group cohort typically results in advantages in sport and academic outcomes (Musch & Grondin, 2001). However, previous research has predominantly isolated relative age's influence on development outcomes (i.e., sport participation or academic achievement). This study explored interactions between relative age, educational achievement, participation in school and extracurricular sport, and an indicator of positive youth development (i.e., feelings of connectedness to school). A secondary analyses of Ontario secondary school students (N = 22,915; average age = 15.7, SD = 1.25; 50.2% female) from the COMPASS study was conducted. Overall, the greatest percentage of students who participated in sports was found in Quartile 1, followed by Quartiles 2, 3 and 4 (x2 range = 20.12 - 60.91, p < .001). There was also a statistically significant effect of relative age (favouring relatively older youth) on feelings of connectedness [F(3, 21978) = 5.50, p = 0.001]. Moreover, sport participation was positively related to academic achievement and feelings of connectedness (OR = 1.15). Finally, feelings of connectedness were positively related to sport participation as well as higher academic achievement, for all relative age quartiles. Future research should seek to investigate the effects of relative age on other youth sport and education outcomes, especially as they relate to positive youth development and other multi-dimensional aspects of youths' developmental ecology (e.g., socioeconomic status and participation in other non-sport extracurricular activities).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".