Effectiveness of an online acceptance and commitment therapy programme for perfectionism in soccer players: A randomized control trial.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is currently limited understanding of how to reduce perfectionism in sport. With research outside of sport as impetus, in the present study, we evaluated the effectiveness of an online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT)-based intervention for reducing perfectionism and improving precompetition emotions in soccer players. Following a preregistered protocol, 81 female soccer players (M age = 24.28 years, SD = 6.77) were randomly allocated to either an intervention group (n = 41) or a waitlist control group (n = 40). The intervention group had access to a set of online ACT-based modules for 8 weeks. Athletes completed measures of trait perfectionism, perfectionism cognitions, and precompetition emotions preintervention and postintervention. A 2 (group) × 2 (time) analysis of variance revealed significant interaction effects for trait perfectionism, perfectionism cognitions, and precompetition emotions. Following the intervention, the two groups displayed significant mean differences for trait perfectionism, perfectionism cognitions, and almost all precompetition emotions. However, due to lower reliability of some instruments, findings regarding postcompetition emotions were discounted. The findings suggest that online ACT-based interventions may be a viable and effective way to reduce perfectionism in soccer players (but not necessarily improving precompetition emotions). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 it