Left skate first: Exploring routines and supersitions among professional hockey athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to popular media, and are commonplace among competitive athletes. While there is a growing body of sport psychology literature focused on pre-competition routines, there is less literature examining the role of in sport. This study critically examined the integrated role of and among professional hockey players. Through semi-structured interviews with seven former professional male hockey players, three key themes emerged from the data. First, it was found that and were used to manage butterflies, helping athletes obtain an optimal level of arousal for performance. Second, participants explained how the process of engaging in and facilitated a sense of comfort, helping to reduce debilitative anxiety while achieving facilitative anxiety. Third, the importance of the was discussed; the more important the game, the higher the need to achieve proper levels of facilitative anxiety. Findings suggest and are essential behaviours for athletes' game preparation and pre-competition anxiety management, despite often being considered irrelevant (e.g., Brevers et al., 2011). Given participants often used the terms routines and superstitions interchangeably, future research should focus on further examination, understanding, and definition of each term.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".