Academic Timing and the Relative Age Effect Among Male and Female Athletes in Canadian Interuniversity Volleyball
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the moderating effects of academic timing on the relative age effect in men's and women's U Sports (formerly Canadian Interuniversity Sports) volleyball. Interuniversity sport exists within an academic setting and encompasses different age groups within a single team, making it necessary to account for the academic timing of student athletes when studying the relative age effect. To be considered “on-time,” a student athlete's birthdate and expected athletic eligibility status must coincide, while a “delayed” student athlete will have an athletic eligibility corresponding with a younger cohort. We collected birthdates and eligibility years from the U Sports eligibility certificates of 2,780 male and 3,715 female athletes for the years 2006–2007 through 2013–2014; we then classified athletes as either on-time or delayed. We used a chi-square (χ 2 ) goodness-of-fit tests to compare the observed distributions of student athletes' actual versus “expected” births across each quartile. Our analyses demonstrated an advantage for athletes born in the first half of the selection year. These results suggest that delaying entry into university may help equalize the playing field for relatively younger athletes wishing to compete in U Sports volleyball.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".