“Never having the right to make a mistake, I think that’s the hardest part of being an official”: Exploring young sport officials’ experiences of abuse and their related coping mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although officials form an integral part of the sporting world, they are likely to experience abuse during their involvement. Research on abuse toward sport officials has primarily been conducted with adults and elite-level officials. Very little is known about young officials whose experiences may be different yet crucial in developing preventative measures tailored to their specific needs and context. Our goal was to document experiences of abuse by young officials aged between 14 and 20 years old. A total of 27 participants completed interviews on the nature of the abuse they experienced, the resulting consequences, and how they coped with those experiences. The findings from the thematic analysis highlighted descriptions of frequent abuse, of lower intensity, and of a psychological nature such as being yelled at or insulted. Participants described using both short-term coping strategies during the event of abuse, such as giving a warning, as well as long-term strategies to make sense of their experience, such as rationalization. Our study adds to the current literature by underlining similarities of young officials’ experiences with those of adults, such as type and frequency of abuse, while also identifying relevant distinctions in terms of perceived organizational support and consequences. In sum, our results suggest that abuse toward officials is deeply ingrained in the sport context and not only at the professional level. This reinforces the need for increased recognition of young officials’ reality within a broader cultural shift delegitimizing abuse in all forms toward officials of all ages and levels.Lay Summary: We interviewed 27 young sport officials, aged between 14 and 20 years old, to document their experience of abuse. The results highlight both similarities with adult officials and important differences. More attention should be given to the reality of young officials operating at the grassroots level.IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICEYoung officials experienced frequent, low intensity, mostly psychological abuse perpetrated by coaches and parents.Participants described short-term coping strategies during events of abuse, and long-term coping strategies to make sense of these experiences.Increased attention should be given to the experience of young officials to develop specific intervention strategies.A cultural shift is needed to delegitimize violence in all its forms toward officials of all ages and levels.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".