Circadian variation in coaches’ decision-making in the National Football League’s evening games
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to explore whether National Football League (NFL) coaches show variation in their decision-making on fourth down when traveling through time zones. Data from visiting teams in games from 20 seasons (2000–2020) of the NFL were retrieved from online sources (n = 5360 games). Decision-making was measured with the percentage of offensive plays on fourth down. A factorial ANCOVA was done to verify whether travel direction had an impact on fourth downs in evening games, while controlling for the seasons. A moderation analysis was computed to verify whether the time of game moderates the relationship between longitudinal distance traveled and decisions on fourth downs. Results showed that in evening games, coaches in teams traveling westward called more offensive plays on fourth down, compared to when they traveled in any other direction. Results from the moderation analysis showed that only in evening games, further westward longitudinal degrees traveled predict more fourth downs. For the first time, this study offers insight that circadian misalignment may not only affect player performance but also influence coaching decisions in professional sports. These results beg the question whether other aspects of coaching or staff decisions show circadian variations in professional sports.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".