Exploring the Networks of Relationships Between the 5Cs of Positive Youth Development Through Sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The theoretical 5Cs model (character, confidence, competence, connection and caring) is a promising theory for evaluating Positive Youth Development (PYD) through sport. Given the scarcity of studies evaluating the interrelationship between the 5Cs of PYD through sport in the Brazilian context, the aim of the present study was to explore the 5C relationship networks. The sample comprised 308 athletes aged between 14 and 24 (M=18, 5±2.35, 54.9% females), who responded to a battery of 5Cs measures in sport. Network analysis was employed, producing six clusters of items. The network graph results suggested that the items Character (2 – leader in the group; 5 – I am better than other) and Competence (32 – ability to be a leader) are central nodes, while the measures of centrality identified the coach-athlete Connection (42 – with my coach, I am ready to do my best; 43 – with my coach, I adopt a friendly stance) as having greater impact than the clusters. The results corroborated the theoretical grounding, which stresses the role of the coach-athlete relationship in PYD through sport. The practical application of these practices is presented here.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".