Exploring the Influence of Stimulus Events: A Case Study of Undergraduate Student Internships
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Internships are crucial in many sport management students’ paths to the sport industry. This mixed-methods case study sought to understand the nature of events occurring in sport management internships and the impact on two outcomes: student career decision making and subjective well-being. Pre–post internship surveys ( n = 23) and follow-up interviews ( n = 21) identified stimulus events, if intern expectations were met, and if career intentions or subjective well-being were shifted. For participants, stimulus events involved different aspects of the internship (e.g., tasks, supervisor, social interactions, inclusivity, and the environment), and the perceptions of outcomes related to internships varied. In line with image theory, participants followed four impact pathways, with the focus on stimulus events influencing career intentions and then well-being as a result, or conversely well-being then career intentions. The findings have important theoretical and practical implications for both sport management educators and organizational supervisors that can help ensure mutually beneficial experiences for all parties involved.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it