Cultural competence in a multinational group of sport psychology professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sport psychology scholars and practitioners (SPPs) now recognize the importance of cultural competence (CC). However, only a few SPPs have deliberately centered CC in their practice. The purpose of this study was to understand how SPPs conceptualize and develop CC within their professional practice. Our study is grounded in a critical realist ontology and framed within the consensual qualitative research method (CQR). Using a semi-structured interview guide, we interviewed 25 globally situated SPPs (13 males, 12 females) with three to 40 years of professional experience (17.83, SD = 10.88) residing on four different continents. We constructed seven categories to provide a snapshot of how SPPs conceptualize, develop, and emphasize CC as an ethical and moral obligation to engage in effective professional practice. The participating SPPs described how CC is contextual and encompasses one’s cultural knowledge, awareness, and skills developed from professional and personal cultural interactions and investment in cultural professional development. The SPPs shared how CC plays a relevant role in their sport psychology practice. We also highlighted how culture and CC are frequently conceptualized and experienced from a one-dimensional perspective, overlooking the importance of how cultural identities and modes of being interact within and between SPPs and clients or participants. The implications for individuals and professional bodies are discussed for professional development, training, and effective practice.Lay summary: Cultural competence is an ethical and moral obligation for SPPs to engage in effective professional practice. In this study, a multinational group of SPPs shared how they conceptualize, develop, and implement cultural competence within their professional practice. Applied ImplicationsThe development of and deliberate consideration of CC into applied and scholarly practice is an ethical and moral responsibilityIt is important for SPPs to invest in developing their CC, becoming comfortable with making mistakes, and engaging in difficult conversations.It is important for SPPs to ground their CC development in their own reflections as well as personal and professional cultural encounters.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".