MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389104562 · doi:10.1123/tsp.2021-0207

Having a Goal Up Your Sleeve: Promoting a Mastery Climate in a Youth Football Academy Team

2023· article· en· W4389104562 on OpenAlexaff
Niels Nygaard Rossing, Michael Lykkeskov, Luc J. Martin, Ludvig Johan Torp Rasmussen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Sport Psychologist · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAthletesFootballPsychologyGoal settingApplied psychologyAction (physics)Process (computing)Reflection (computer programming)Focus groupFootball playersMedical educationComputer scienceSocial psychologyPhysical therapySociologyPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In sport, there is extensive evidence that supports the benefits associated with a mastery climate. However, limited studies have explored how physical tools could be used to promote mastery climates in youth sport contexts. Using an action research approach, we sought to understand the benefits and drawbacks of applying tools grounded in goal setting to promote a mastery environment: (a) an “arm sleeve” to be worn by athletes during training and matches and (b) a “reflection sheet” for use pre- and posttraining/-matches. These tools were implemented for a 3-week period with a U13 academy team (18 players and two coaches). Based on observation notes, focus groups, and one-on-one interviews, the analysis showed that the arm sleeves were helpful reminders for process goals, whereas the coaches had abandoned the use of reflection sheets due to lack of time. The benefits and drawbacks of the tools are discussed while pedagogical and practical implications are considered.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Sport PsychologistSame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207