An Investigation on Self-Handicapping Levels of Sport Management Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to determine the self-handicapping levels of sports management department students. Furthermore, the study endeavors analyzing the sports management students’ self-handicapping level by gender, grade, grade point average, and exercise status. The study group analyzed with the survey method comprise 158 students enrolled in the Faculty of Sports Science for Sport Management Department at Erciyes University, Kayseri/Turkey during the 2018-2019 academic year. The study utilizes “Self-Handicapping Scale” developed by Jones and Rhodewalt (1982) and adapted to Turkish by Akın, Abacı and Akın (2010) as the data collection tool. The SPSS program was used for data analysis. The results indicate that the sports management students’ self-handicapping level in the study group was “moderate”. Moreover, the self-handicapping levels of the sports management students in the study group did not differ significantly by gender, grade, age and exercise status (p > 0.05). However, it was discovered that self-handicapping levels significantly differ by grade point average (p < 0.05).
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".