MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185087088

A Serial Examination of Academic Timing and Relative Age Effects Among U Sports Basketball Players

2021· article· en· W3185087088 on OpenAlexaff
Emma Duinker, Laura Chittle, Sean Horton, Jess C. Dixon

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue phénEPS / PHEnex Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasketballAthletesContext (archaeology)PsychologyAdvertisingApplied psychologyPhysical therapyMedicineBusinessHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relative age effect (RAE) describes relative (dis)advantages experienced by athletes born earlier in the year compared to their younger counterparts due to organizational cut-off dates. Interuniversity sport offers a unique environment where student-athletes of varying absolute ages compete for positions on a single team. This context can influence the academic timing of student-athletes, which describes the difference in student-athletes’ current and projected athletic eligibilities, and the impact this has on their participation in interuniversity sport. The purpose of this serial investigation was to examine the influence of academic timing on RAEs in U Sports basketball. The results revealed that the RAE was stronger among ‘on-time’ student-athletes, with more student-athletes born in the first half of the year than the second throughout the time period considered in this study. U Sports administrators may want to consider the influence of academic timing on RAEs to inform future policy decisions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue phénEPS / PHEnex JournalSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207