The relationships between relative age effect, personality constructs and achievement level in soccer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Youth soccer academies are challenged with the constant recruitment process of young talented players to select those who will achieve long-term success as an athlete. Youth soccer academies strive to enhance the physical and technical skill development as well as personality development of talented players because psychological characteristics play a crucial role in players' future success in their transition to professional soccer. The least mature players and relatively young players may have a greater need to possess superior technical/tactical or psycho-behavioral skills than those relatively older counterparts because of the higher selection rates of early maturing players. Due to RAEs, a significant decrease in the overall quality of professional soccer teams might be observed because of the loss of talent of physically smaller, but psychologically stronger and more versatile relatively young players who possess proper technical and tactical attributes at an early age. The first objective of this study was to examine any possible relationship between RAE and personality constructs. A second objective was to identify factors and effects that can help in the further improvement of talent selection and equal opportunities for elite youth soccer players based on their underlying RAE. The third objective was to consider the impact of RAE on long-term career development. Methods: In this retrospective observational study, 151 elite youth soccer players between 15 and 18 years of age were first grouped in birth quartiles. Personality constructs were then assessed, using a combination of observations, interviews, and a self-assessment questionnaire. Next competition level after 8 years was evaluated to identify RAEs, differences in personality characteristics and opportunities to reach professional soccer player status between relatively older vs. younger players. Results: = 0.03). In the long term, more players of the youngest birth quartile were signed as professional players (76.2%), compared with relatively old players (46.6%). 65.0% of the 20 players had the highest total score on personality constructs developed as a professional soccer player, vs. 35.0% of the 20 players with the lowest scores. Discussion: In conclusion, this study showed not only further evidence of the RAE but also provided evidence supporting "the underdog hypothesis" in national elite youth teams. Relatively young players were also more likely to get higher value senior professional contracts in the long term. We propose that this may be due to the relatively young players developing superior psychological skills and technical expertise to compensate for their early physical disadvantage. This in turn suggests the need for greater awareness of the importance of personality constructs in the future development of youth elite soccer players. Therefore, the crux of the issue is how youth soccer academies elicit the "best of both worlds" ie. moderating RAE whilst also gaining the benefits of the underdog hypothesis by creating the right environment for every player to develop to their full potential in elite youth soccer academies.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".