MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210511410 · doi:10.53379/cjcd.2022.330

The Role of Sport-Life Balance and Well-Being on Athletic Performance

2022· article· en· W4210511410 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Career Development · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAthletesBalance (ability)FeelingPsychologyApplied psychologySocial psychologyPhysical therapyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study explores the role of sport-life balance and well-being on athletic performance. Canadian athletes who competed at the 2019 Pan American and Para Pan American Games in Lima, Peru were invited to participate in the survey via email. A mixed-methods design was utilized, consisting of an online survey and semi-structured, follow-up interviews. The sample consisted of 72 athletes, spanning eighteen different sports. Our findings demonstrate that while many Olympic and Paralympic athletes are successful in maintaining a strong support network, significant concerns arose regarding meagre finances, a lack of free time, and minimal support both within and outside of sport. Perspectives on the benefits of sport-life balance on performance were mixed, with the majority of athletes revealing that they were unsure of the benefits, did not experience benefits, or experienced negative effects. Feelings of dissatisfaction with performance, experiences of being overwhelmed in managing an athletic career, and tensions in developing a self outside of sport were prevalent among the 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.478
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.213 · 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