The impact of confidence verse calligraphy practice on self-efficacy in skill-accurate athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The unique physical and psychological benefits of Chinese calligraphy practice (i.e., relaxing the body, soothing anxiety, facilitating mind flow, and enhancing self-control) are well-suited to athletes and sports contexts, but calligraphy interventions in sports are few. Our researchers used a mixed research approach to investigate the effects of confidence verse calligraphy practice on self-efficacy (general self-efficacy, sport state confidence, and specialized self-efficacy) in skill-accurate athletes. In a 2 × 3 mixed experimental design, we found that both confidence verse calligraphy practice and neutral character calligraphy practice increased athletes’ general self-efficacy and sport state confidence, and qualitative analyses revealed that this enhancement effect was characterized by a reduction in negative thoughts and emotions when experiencing frustration, but that there were no differences between the two types of writing content. This research is the first attempt to apply calligraphy practice to improve self-efficacy and extends the mental training methods for Chinese national level athletes (i.e., national first-class and above).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".