Exploring How The Covid-19 Pandemic Affected Coaches’ Relationships With Athletes On Adolescent Travel Sport Teams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to explore how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected coach-athlete relationships for coaches of Ontario, Canada-based adolescent travel sports teams. From March of 2020 until May 2021 multiple Ontario youth travel sports organizations canceled/postponed their 2020-2021 seasons because of the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, it is expected that the stoppage of travel adolescent sports in Ontario affected coaches' ability to develop quality coach-athlete relationships. Developing high-quality coach-athlete relationships for coaches and athletes have been positively associated with satisfaction, happiness, and lower levels of burnout within sports. Therefore, qualitatively understanding if and how the COVID-19 pandemic affected coach-athlete relationship development from coaches’ perceptions is valuable information for youth sports organizations so that they can provide positive sporting experiences for coaches and athletes. Six to 15 adolescent travel sport coaches will be recruited from provincial sport organizations (e.g., Dive Ontario) in Ontario. Coaches will be asked to complete a 60–90-minute semi-structured interview via Zoom technology to: explore how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted their ability to develop their coach-athlete relationships, what strategies they used to cultivate relationships with their athletes during the COVID-19 pandemic and what were the differences and similarities of developing coach-athlete relationships before and during the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of the coaches.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".