Initial Validity Evidence for the Youth Interpersonal Behaviors Questionnaire in Sport (Y-IBQ)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Interpersonal Behaviors Questionnaire (IBQ) in Sport assesses athlete perceptions of coach interpersonal behaviors that support or thwart athletes’ basic psychological needs. While different sources of validity evidence for responses to the IBQ have been provided for adults, only validity evidence for relations to other variables has been provided with youth. Moreover, potential problems with internal structure for youths’ responses to the IBQ have recently been noted and motivated the current study. Specifically, a three-phase mixed-methods design was employed to provide validity evidence for modification of the IBQ for youth. Phase I empirically examined the internal structure for youth athletes’ responses to the IBQ. Phase II used cognitive think-aloud interviews to identify and then modify problematic IBQ items to create the Youth Interpersonal Behaviors Questionnaire in Sport (Y-IBQ). Phase III examined the psychometric properties of the Y-IBQ to provide initial validity evidence for this instrument in a youth athlete sample.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 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".