State politics and gender diversity in sport governance
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
Abstract This study investigates the relationship between state politics and sport governance based on an institutional framework and the concept of spillover effects. Specifically, it examines whether spillover effects occur from state parliament and government composition to board gender diversity within sport governing bodies. Organizational-level data from German national and state sport governing bodies were collected ( n = 930). They were combined with state-level data on the government composition by gender and political party (parliament, ministers) based on the location of each sport governing body’s headquarter. The results show that on average 20.1% of board members in sport governing bodies are women. Regression analyses indicate that the share of parliamentarians from the Social Democrats and the Green party is positively associated with the share of women in sport governance, while the share of Liberals in the parliament is negatively related. The share of women parliamentarians from the Social party and the share of women Conservative ministers are negatively related to women in sport governance. The findings indicate that women representation in sport governance is linked to state politics, suggesting that spillover effects occur from an organizations’ political environment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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