Thriving in youth sport: the antecedents and consequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thriving, “a psychological state composed of the joint experience of vitality and learning (Spreitzer, Sutcliffe, Dutton, Sonenshein, & Grant [2005]. A socially embedded model of thriving at work. Organization Science, 16(5), 537–549.)” might offer further insight into the problem of youth sport development research. The purpose of the study was to investigate the mechanisms underlying thriving within a youth sport context. More specifically, the present study considered the perspective of Self-Determination Theory and in particular, how hedonic and eudaimonic motives, as antecedents of thriving, influenced youth athletes’ outcomes (i.e., intention to continue sport, subjective well-being in sport, and goal progress), consequences of thriving. 196 youth sport participants answered an online survey. Path analysis was conducted to test our hypotheses. We used the bias-corrected bootstrap procedure to examine the hypothesised indirect effects. Our results showed that both hedonic and eudaimonic motives were positively related to all outcome variables (intention to continue sport, subjective well-being in sport, and goal progress) through both the basic psychological need satisfaction and thriving. Thriving is an important psychological concept that can facilitate youth athletes to acquire important outcomes for youth sport participation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".