Perceptions About Quality of Interpersonal Processes and Practice Activities in Youth Sport Are Interdependent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite calls in the literature, little is known about how dimensions of a social and task nature relate to each other in school and out-of-school learning environments. This study explored whether interpersonal and task dimensions of the youth sport environment, as perceived by young people, are related, and, if so, how they are related. We used data from 310 adolescent sport participants from eastern Canada ( M age = 14.69 ± 1.60 years; 54.8% girls). Participants completed comprehensive assessments of interpersonal dimensions of the sport environment and the characteristics of learning activities they do in practices. We used canonical correlation analysis to examine the multivariate shared relationship between the variable sets. The relationship was largely captured by the first three functions in the canonical model. The first two functions revealed areas of intersection between perceptions of interpersonal and practice-based activity factors in the form of supports and challenges for the learning and development process in sport. Accounting for the participants’ age, the third function displayed characteristics consistent with recent descriptions of complex environments in youth sport. The findings suggest that adolescents’ perceptions of interpersonal- and task-related features of sport are interdependent, and highlight the relevance of including variables assessing both factors in studies that attempt to characterize and understand learning environments in sport and other achievement domains. Findings also afford new insights into whether dimensions of a social and task nature are complementary, and inadequacies in one dimension can be attenuated by strengths in another or not.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".