Building 'us' from within: A feasibility study to explore athlete and coach experiences of a peer-led social identity intervention in youth sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although social identity has been associated with several positive outcomes in youth sport, limited evidence exists regarding intervention programs designed to strengthen youth athletes' identification with their team. This study explored the feasibility of a peer-led intervention aimed at cultivating a shared social identity (i.e., 5RS; Fransen et al., 2020), adapted for youth sport. In the 5RS intervention, a shared leadership structure was implemented and appointed athlete leaders helped to guide each team through various phases (5R's; Readying, Reflecting, Representing, Realizing, and Reporting). Together, athletes built a shared sense of 'us' from within, using terms and symbols relevant to the group. Participants were members of five competitive youth ice hockey teams (N = 84, Mage = 13.02 years, range = 10-15), who completed the intervention at midseason. Focus group interviews with each of the five teams involved appointed athlete leaders (n = 19), and three interviews took place with coaches from three teams (n = 4). Overall, athletes and coaches expressed support for the acceptability, implementation, and practicality of the intervention. Specifically, participants highlighted the novel components of the 5RS intervention, including the creation of a unique team 'trademark' by the athletes and the shared leadership mapping exercise that identified athlete leaders. Importantly, athletes and coaches also raised several important considerations for further intervention development, relating to intervention timing and follow-up booster sessions to solidify the content. Collectively, the findings offered initial feasibility evidence and recommendations to enhance the design of the main intervention protocol.Acknowledgments: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
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 | 0.019 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".