Boredom in Sport Practice: Using Control-Value Theory to Test Relationships Between Cognitive Appraisals, Boredom, and Perceived Success
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Boredom is a deactivating emotion that is gaining attention in sport research. We draw from the Control-Value Theory of Achievement Emotions (CVTAE) to examine the relationships between cognitive appraisals, boredom, and perceived success, and test if the relationships are moderated by competitive playing experience. A cross-sectional survey was administered to 179 Canadian athletes aged 18–35 participating in competitive sports. Using moderated-mediation regression analyses, we tested if perceived value and control in practice are related to boredom; if a value-success relationship is mediated by boredom; and if it is moderated by competitive playing experience. We found perceived value was negatively linked to boredom (β = -.22) and associated with higher perceived success a (β = .55), but the relationship was not mediated by boredom. A significant Perceived Value x Years of Playing Experience interaction emerged; and after probing the interaction, we found the relationship between perceived value and boredom was strongest for athletes with high playing experience (β = -.36) relative to less experienced athletes. The value-boredom-success mediation relationship was not significant at levels of the moderator. Although more research is needed beyond this correlational design, our study suggests using CVTAE to understand the links between appraisals and emotions may be relevant in sport achievement domains, such as in sport practices.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".