A Possible-Selves Intervention for Sport Career Transition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exceptional demands of high-performance sport can limit athletes’ engagement in an array of developmental tasks such as identity exploration and the acquisition of competencies outside of the sport setting. Such tasks are needed to develop an integrated and cohesive sense of self (Lavallee & Robinson, 2007), pursuits which primarily occur in emerging adulthood. The extant literature has consistently suggested that sport career termination is one of the most significant and potentially traumatic experiences for a wide-range of competitive athletes including interuniversity sport participants (Lavallee, 2005); however, minimal sport transition interventions are in place to address its impact on athletes’ adaptation to life after sport, particularly the effects on athletes’ identities. This study utilizes a pre-test and post-test research design to study the effectiveness of a novel group psychotherapy intervention titled Identity Matters, which seeks to influence athletes’ sense of future possibilities in a variety of life domains including vocational, interpersonal, and intra-personal components, in comparison to an active control condition titled Planning Ahead, a didactic and traditional group career intervention method. Results are expected to inform career professionals’ further theorizing about athletes’ identity tasks during young adulthood, as well as the extensibility and development of future possible-selves, or one’s sense of possibility for the self in the future, which can contribute to more robust career transition outcomes. While a large number of retiring athletes who have experienced serious psychosocial and health conditions has been documented in the literature, it remains imperative to investigate ways of better supporting them throughout this complex and challenging life transition
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".