Translation, adaptation, and evidence of content validity and internal structure of the brazilian version of the Contest Orientation Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to translate, adapt, and present the first evidence of content validity and internal structure of the Brazilian version of the Contest Orientation Scale. To this end, three studies were conducted. The first study was the translation of the items of the scale and adaptation to the Brazilian sports context, considering cultural and theoretical aspects by four judges, fluent in both languages (English and Portuguese). The second study was the content validation of the translated version. To this end, three judges evaluated Language Clarity (CVCtLC = 0.90), Theoretical Relevance (CVCtTR = 0.91), and Theoretical Dimensionality (KTotal = 0.71). The results ranged from good to satisfactory. The third study applied the scale to 188 athletes of both sexes, with a mean age of 30.6 years. A semi-confirmatory factor analysis was performed, which presented a clean factorial solution, with adjustment ranging from reasonable to satisfactory and satisfactory reliability indices (α = 0.744). In conclusion, the Brazilian version of the scale presents indices favorable to its application to evaluate the orientations to the dispute in the sport.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".