0018 Time Zone Circadian Misalignment and Defensive Performance in Professional Hockey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Research has highlighted the impact of circadian rhythm misalignment on athletic performance in sports involving travel across time zones. Teams traveling westward often face circadian disadvantages during evening competitions, as they play at a later circadian alignment than their opponent. While previous studies have primarily focused on outcomes such as wins and losses, few have explored the effects of circadian misalignment on specific game statistics. This study investigates the influence of teams adjustment to time zones travel on the number of shots allowed to opponents. Methods Data from NHL games played between 2009 and 2021 (n = 27,642), excluding the COVID-19 season, were collected from online sources (hockey-reference.com). Travel-adjusted time zone was computed for both teams as shown in Charest et al. (2022), from which a Direction of Misalignment (westward, none, eastward) between teams was computed for each game. A one-way ANOVA was used with the Direction of Misalignment on the number of shots allowed to opponents. Results A significant effect of Direction of Misalignment was observed, F(2, 27640) = 3.26, p =.04. Teams with a circadian misalignment later than their opponents (westward alignment) allowed significantly more shots (M = 30.71) compared to teams with an earlier one (eastward alignment) (M = 30.27, p =.05). No significant difference was found between teams with a later circadian alignment and those with no difference (M = 30.39, p =.06), nor between teams with no difference and those with an earlier alignment (p =.66). Conclusion These results suggest that teams playing at a later part of their circadian alignment than their opponents allow more shots to opposing teams. This could indicate a circadian-related disadvantage that impairs defensive effectiveness on ice. Future research should investigate mechanisms to mitigate the effects of circadian misalignment in professional sports, potentially informing scheduling strategies to optimize player performance. Support (if any)
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".