A Qualitative Study of Social Media and Electronic Communication among Canadian Adolescent Female Soccer Players
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
Social media and electronic communication perpetuate adolescents’ lives and have the potential to shape the nature of adolescent athletes’ experiences and interactions with members of their sports teams. However, there is no research to date that has examined adolescent female athletes’ use of social media and electronic communication. Athletes, parents, and coaches (N = 22) from one soccer organization participated in semistructured interviews discussing their use of and perspectives on social media and electronic communication. Interview data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Findings include four themes: (a) uses of social media and electronic communication (in and out of the sport context); (b) athlete, parent, and coaches’ perspectives of social media engagement; (c) friendships and trust with teammates; and (d) the development and perception of subgroups. Recommendations include developing policies for the use of social media and electronic communication for adolescents in sports settings and for coaches, parents, and athletes to engage in open communication about the uses of social media and electronic communication.
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 | 0.008 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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