The Inner Lives of Indoor Youth Soccer Parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The overall purpose of this study was to examine the of indoor youth soccer parents throughout the course of a season. The term inner lives refers to the aspects of being a sport parent that occurred not just at sporting events but also in the family home, in car rides, and during other interactions in the family setting. Data were collected from three parents; Holly, Bellamy, and Steve (2 mothers and 1 father respectively, Mage= 47 years) over a three-month period during the 2018-2019 indoor soccer season. Parents completed audio-diaries in which they discussed their day-to-day responsibilities, conversations they had with their children regarding sport, and challenges they faced as sport parents. They also participated in individual semi-structured interviews at the beginning and end of the season. Data were analyzed using narrative thematic analysis (Riessman, 2008). While common themes were found among all three participants (e.g., time management, emphasizing effort and fun, relationships with coaches, and teaching life skills) each parent experienced a unique journey throughout the season. Conflict between Holly and her husband in terms of behaviours and attitudes toward sport, Bellamy's challenges as a single parent, and Steve's performance-oriented approach to parenting are represented with idiographic narrative accounts. Findings from this study provide insight into the different qualities of sport parents and the intricate demands they face in youth sport. In the future, it may be useful to consider the distinctive experiences and challenges parents face when designing sport parent education and support programs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".