MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307358196 · doi:10.1080/1750984x.2022.2132526

A review of the interpersonal experience, expression, and regulation of emotions in sport

2022· review· en· W4307358196 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science
KeywordsPsychologySituational ethicsInterpersonal communicationAthletesTypologyCLARITYSocial psychologyEmotional expressionEmotional regulationExpression (computer science)Interpersonal relationshipApplied psychologyDevelopmental psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has recently been a surge in sport psychology research examining various aspects of the interpersonal and social processes related to emotions and emotion regulation. The purpose of this study was to review the literature related to the interpersonal experience, expression, and regulation of emotions in sport, in order to provide a comprehensive overview of the studies that have been conducted to date. A scoping review of the literature (Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. [2009]. A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108) using a systematic search process returned 7,769 entries that were screened for inclusion; the final sample of studies included in the review consisted of 79 relevant articles and 8 dissertations. The results describe the interconnected findings on athletes’ self-regulation of emotions in social contexts, interpersonal emotion regulation, collective emotions (group-based emotions, emotional contagion, and effervescence), emotional expressions, and individual and contextual moderators (e.g. personality, culture, norms, gender, roles, and situational/temporal aspects). We identify key issues to advance theory and research, including: the need for programmatic research to investigate these processes, their effects, and underlying mechanisms; greater theoretical and conceptual clarity; more research among diverse populations (e.g. female athletes, youth athletes); the need to consider interconnected emotional phenomena in future research; and the need for applied intervention research.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.357 · 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