Investigating the Impact of Food Rewards on Children’s Motivation to Participate in Sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children who are physically active and involved in organized sport report having the unhealthiest diets. Research suggests excessive calories may be attributed to the prevalence of fast food and candy which are often provided as rewards in sport. This study explored the use of food as a reward in youth sport and the perceived impact it has on children’s motivation to participate in recreational soccer and ice hockey. A multiple instrumental case study approach was utilized. Children aged 4–12 (n = 64), parents (n = 30), and coaches (n = 18) were recruited within central and northeastern Ontario, Canada to participate in focus groups and individual interviews. Transcribed audio recordings underwent inductive thematic analysis. Key themes included: Fun and fast: The culture of food in youth soccer and hockey; (Un)importance of food rewards: The how and why of motivating children in sport; and Youth sport is expensive: Gratitude for sponsorship in youth sport. Themes explain the role of food and food rewards as an element of the youth sport culture as well as the importance of sponsors, regardless of food affiliation, in youth sport. Overall, children’s participation and effort would continue without food rewards; however, they continue to be offered food to motivate and celebrate performance in youth sport. Findings highlight the need to increase knowledge and awareness among parents and coaches on what truly motivates children to help foster healthier strategies for celebrating success and supporting lifelong physical activity.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".