Advancing Understanding of Toddler and Preschooler Sport Participation: A Research Area in its Infancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this doctoral dissertation was to advance understanding of early-years (<6) sport and organized physical activity (OPA) participation. This research involved a scoping review, followed by a qualitative case-study, which drew upon multiple data collection methods (semi-structured interviews, observation) from multiple perspectives (toddlers, preschoolers, parents, coaches; N=27), providing a comprehensive picture of early-years sport (Baxter & Jack, 2008; Creswell, 2012). Specific goals across four manuscripts/studies were to: (1) systematically review and synthesize research examining developmental outcomes associated with early-years sport involvement, (2) explore parents, coaches, and childrens perceived outcomes and experiences of early-years sport, (3) explore early-years sport pathways and patterns of engagement, and (4) explore coaches experiences in early-years sport, focusing on challenges-faced and strategies drawn-upon for effective coaching. Scoping review findings (Study 1) offer preliminary evidence that early sport and OPA participation is related to primarily positive outcomes (e.g., enhanced social skills, pro-social behaviours, self-regulation); however, negative and inconclusive outcomes were also identified. Study 2 showed some alignment between parents, coaches, and childrens perceived outcomes and experiences in early-years sport in the areas of physical activity, energy management, sport skill acquisition, physical literacy, learning to win and lose, and social/life skills. Findings were moderated by childrens age, developmental capacities, sport readiness, and attendance in other programs (e.g., music, preschool). Study 3 offered insight into early-years sport, OPA, and unstructured sport pathways, highlighting common features and engagement patterns within programming (e.g., structure, movement/sport skill focus, play-based activities). Findings suggest existing life-span sport participation/development models may not align with delivery of and experiences within early-years sport programming. Finally, Study 4 highlighted unique challenges and strategies for effective coaching across diverse early-years coaching contexts, showing differences according to program-type (i.e., private and club-based versus community-based). Collectively, this research advances limited understanding of early-years sport and OPA participation, which may help inform key stakeholders decisions around early-years sport programming; several important future research directions are outlined.
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 | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".