Otava mental skill for sports 3 - validation and gender invariance for the portuguese version
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
The aim of the study was to validate the Portuguese version of the Ottawa Mental Skills Assessment Tool (OMSAT 3p) through confirmatory factor analyses of the measurement model, and gender invariance. A total of 524 Portuguese athletes (male and female) aged between 12 and 42 years old, participated in this study (M = 19.21; SD = 5.46). The main results show that the psychometric qualities of the 48-item OMSAT 3 are adequate and that it has acceptable validity, allowing it to assess Foundation Skills (SRMR = 0.042, CFI = 0.999, TLI = 0.998, RMSEA = 0.008 and χ2 /df = 1.46), Psychosomatic Skills (SRMR = 0.056, CFI = 0.979, TLI = 0.975, RMSEA = 0.042 and χ2 /df = 1.93) and Cognitive Skills (SRMR = 0.058, CFI = 0.973, TLI = 0.968, RMSEA = 0.044 and χ2 /df =1.99). This version also showed adequate values for configural, metric and scalar invariance by gender (ΔCFI < 0.01) (ΔRMSEA <0,01). The Portuguese version of the OMSAT 3 can be used with reasonable confidence to assess psychological skills in a sports context. Keywords: Confirmatory Factor Analysis; OMSAT 3; Psychological Skills, Foundation Skills; Psychosomatic Skills; Cognitive Skills
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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