The Relative Age Effect in Ice Hockey: Analysis of Its Presence, Its Fading and of a Reversal Effect among Junior and Professional Leagues
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study analyzes the relative age effect (RAE) among the world's best junior hockey leagues and in the NHL. Despite the prevalence of RAE in ice hockey, past research suggests its fading-reversal over time, which may occur at later stages of athletic development. The hypothesis of the RAE reversal was tested with two sources of raw data files from the 2021-2022 season: 15 of the best international junior and minor professional leagues (N = 7 399) and the NHL (N = 812). Birth quartile distributions were analyzed to verify the prevalence of RAE and quantile regression was used to test the reversal of RAE hypotheses. Advanced hockey metrics were aggregated from multiple data sources and used to compare early born with late born players using birth quartiles. Prevalence of the RAE was verified with crosstabs analyses and quantile regression was used to test the reversal effect. Results indicated that the RAE still prevailed in ice hockey, with higher magnitude in Canadian leagues. Regression analyses showed that late-born junior and minor pro players, despite getting less exposure in terms of games played, attained levels of offensive production similar to those of early born players. Late-born players able to emerge in the NHL performed similarly and sometimes displayed better performance (in some markers). Results suggest that stakeholders should find ways to pay special attention to late born players in talent identification processes and offer them opportunities to develop at the highest 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it