“When are you gonna commit?” Exploring the experiences of youth athletes and their parents prior to a sporting transition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this research was to explore the experiences of youth athletes and their parents in the lead up to a sporting transition into the development years of competitive sport. Parents (n = 6) and children (n = 5) were interviewed from sports teams in the Greater Toronto Area. Case study methodology and phenomenological analysis were used to explore each athlete and parents’ individual experience and, where appropriate, cross-case comparisons were made. Results indicate that athletes experienced psychosocial challenges prior to their transition, such as anxiety about competitive soccer. Parents were the primary support network and experienced their own stressors such as shielding their child from organisational politics in youth sport. It is argued that some youth athletes participate in highly competitive sport and are encouraged to commit to an athletic career before they have successfully developed the psychosocial skills to manage the challenges associated with competitive sport. Results are discussed with regard to the holistic athletic careers model (Wylleman et al., [2013]. Athletes’ careers in Belgium: A holistic perspective to understand and alleviate challenges occurring throughout the athletic and post-athletic career. In N. B. Stambulova, T. V. Ryba, & T. V (Eds.), Athletes’ careers across cultures (1st ed, pp. 51–62). Routledge.). There is a need to conduct more research on the early transitions into competitive sport, which may not be developmentally appropriate for young athletes.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".