Peer-initiated motivational climate, mental health and adherence in competitive youth sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through interactions with important social agents (coaches, parents, and peers), youth athletes will infer that being successful in sport falls somewhere along the continuum between (a) improvement and hard work and (b) winning at all costs. The environment created as a result of these interactions has important implications for athlete mental health and future sport participation. This study examined the relationships between peer-initiated motivational climate, athlete wellbeing, and intention to return to the team. Youth athletes ( N = 130; M age = 13.45 years) from nine competitive ice hockey teams completed a questionnaire near the end of season. Using mixed-effects linear modeling, findings revealed that a task-related peer climate significantly predicted wellbeing ( β = 0.32, 95% CI [0.18, 0.47]) and intention to return ( β = 0.43, 95% CI [0.17, 0.68]), whereas an ego-related peer climate was not significantly related to wellbeing ( β = 0.10, 95% CI [−0.07, 0.26]) or intentions to return ( β = −0.29, 95% CI [−0.58, 0.01]).
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".