ScholarOne - “LET’S TAKE CARE OF THE FORGOTTEN ONES”: VALIDATION OF GOALTENDERS’ ICE HOCKEY PERCEIVED COMPETENCE SCALE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report outlines the development and validation of a sport-specific perceived competence scale tailored to ice hockey goaltenders. Drawing on previous research highlighting the multidimensional nature of perceived competence among athletes, our study aimed to conceptualize and validate perceived competence within the unique context of ice hockey goaltending. Following procedures from a previous extensive validation study, the three-phase study involved elicitation, development, and validation. In the first phase, expert coaches identified competencies essential for goaltenders’ success, resulting in a 17-item initial scale. Phase 2 demonstrated the scale’s temporal stability, with all items exhibiting acceptable test-retest coefficients. In the final validation phase, exploratory factor analysis identified three dimensions: technical abilities, coachability, and resilience. Rigorous factor analysis addressed problematic items, producing a refined 14-item Goaltenders’ Ice Hockey Perceived Competence Scale. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the model’s excellent fit, supporting the three-factor structure. The dimensions included technical abilities, coachability, and resilience, emphasizing the psychological aspects’ crucial role in goaltender competence. The study contributes to understanding perceived competence in a specialized sports context and provides a reliable measurement tool for practitioners to monitor ice hockey goaltenders’ development. Future research should explore the cross-cultural and linguistic invariance of the scale among ice hockey goalies. Overall, the Goaltenders’ Ice Hockey Perceived Competence Scale offers a valuable instrument for assessing and enhancing athlete development in the distinctive realm of ice hockey goaltending.
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 | 0.014 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".