MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2941444125

Experiencing defeat in competition: Cognitive appraisal, stress, and emotion regulation in competitors high and low in self-compassion

2018· article· en· W2941444125 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amber D. Mosewich, Benjamin Sereda, Craig S. Chapman, Tanya R. Berry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Exercise, Movement, and Sport (SCAPPS refereed abstracts repository) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelf-compassionPsychologyCompetition (biology)Affect (linguistics)Clinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMindfulness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Performers in achievement domains inevitably have to manage losses and mistakes, but differ in their responses to these events. The purpose of this study was to examine if trait self-compassion predicted responses to a competition failure. Fifty-seven participants (28 male; Mage=21.46 years, SD=2.99) completed three computer-based where outcome was controlled so they lost significantly more often than they won. Participants in the upper quartile comprised a high self-compassion [HSCG; n=14 (6 male); self-compassion: M=3.98, SD=0.20], and those in the lowest quartile a self-compassion [LSCG; n=15 (6 male); self-compassion: M=2.20, SD=0.35]. HSCG demonstrated more adaptive responses to competition losses than LSCG. Prior to the competition, the low self-compassion group reported higher threat appraisals [t(27)=3.19] and stress [t(20.18)=2.60]. After the first competition, LSCG reported higher demands [t(27)=2.32] and stress [t(27)=3.74], and lower perceptions of resources [t(27)=-2.26]. After the second competition, LSCG reported higher demands [t(27)=2.47], threat appraisal [t(27)=3.02], and stress [t(27)=4.57]. LSCG also reported higher levels of stress after completing all competitions [t(27)=4.05]. A 2x4 repeated measures ANOVA indicated a significant group x time interaction for stress [F(120, 48)=1.66] and negative affect [F(96.44, 38.58)=1.65]. Participants low in self-compassion reported higher levels of negative affect prior to competition, after each competition, and at conclusion. HSCG reported engaging in more acceptance [t(27)= -3.61] and planning [t(27)=-3.62], and less catastrophizing [t(27)=6.76] and other blame [t(19.44)=2.66]. All results were significant (p< .05). Collectively, self-compassion is associated with adaptive emotion regulation strategies and lower threat appraisal and stress when experiencing defeat in competition.Acknowledgments: Supported by the University of Alberta Human Performance Fund

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Exercise, Movement, and Sport (SCAPPS refereed abstracts repository)Same topicMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFrench-language works237,207