Investigating the participation motives of women rugby union players in Canada and Wales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p> Previous interview research has indicated that women’s rugby union participation is multi-faceted, with most players providing several different motives for getting involved in the sport.The aim of this study was to further examine participation motivation in women’s rugby byreplicating and extending the findings of the earlier research (Kerr, 2021) using a differentapproach to data collection and a larger sample size. Snowball sampling was used to recruitrugby playing female participants. A qualitative study focusing on participant responses toopen-ended questions on participation motivation from an online survey was then undertaken.Thematic analysis was utilized to identify sub-themes and major themes from the data. Thesewere found to be common to both Canadian and Welsh female rugby players. Four majorthemes were identified from the survey data. These were:Intrinsic motivation; Unique culture;Barriers to participation; and Acknowledgment of future generations.These major themessubsumed a number of sub-themes with overlapping characteristics.Empowermentandsenseof challengewere included under the major themeIntrinsic motivation, andcountercultureandstereotypesincluded under the major themeBarriers to participation.The current studyreplicated a number of findings from the original study, but there were two new findings. Thefirst was that some players experienced a strong sense of empowerment through playing rugby.The second was the desire to give something back and help to continue to grow the sport.Reversal theory was used to interpret the findings and explain the psychological background tothe players’ participation motives. </p>
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".