Psychological Status During and After the Preparation of a Long-distance Triathlon Event in Amateur Athletes
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
International Journal of Exercise Science 14(5): 134-148, 2021. Preparation for an endurance event among amateur athletes requires a major commitment on their part. Knowing amateur athletes’ psychological characteristics during a training period should be a priority for coaches and athletes. The aim of our longitudinal study was to characterize the psychological profile of amateur athletes over a training period of six months prior to and after a long-distance triathlon. Thirty-two amateur athletes (13 females; 19 males; 1.5±1.3 years of experience) were recruited for this observational study. All participants (39±9.9 years old; weighs 73±12.9 kg; measure 172±10.2 cm) underwent a physical fitness assessment pre- and post 6-months of training, a monthly psychological questionnaire battery assessing mood, positive and negative affect, passion and motivation and, for some participants (n=5), an interview post event. Positive emotions increased until the sixth month, from 38.1±22.0 to 54.3±7.2 (Z=3.49, p<0.001, r=0.80). Participants were more harmonious (29.0±3.0) than obsessive (13.0±1.0) with their triathlon's passion (Z=4.91, p<0.001, r=0.85). Participants felt a high level of intrinsic motivation (15.9±1.76) and a low level of external motivation (4.9±1.08) about their triathlon training (p<0.05). The vigor score is the only sub scale that significantly changed from the 1st to the 6th month of training, and ranged between 21.4±10.6 and 28.1±4.1 (Z=2.0, p=0.046, r=0.46). This longitudinal observational study is the first to have explored athletes' psychological and emotional parameters over a training period of six months prior to a long-distance triathlon event and one month after. Thus, specific interventions and mental training can be structured around these important milestones.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it