MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7010362106

Ice hockey team captains' perceptions of their behaviors

2004· dissertation· en· W7010362106 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2004
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicProbability and Statistical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsIce hockeyAthletesInterpersonal communicationPerceptionInterpersonal relationshipTransactional leadershipTeam sport
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on leadership in sport has primarily focused on the behaviors of coaches despite the claim that leadership behaviors of athletes are considered by many to be an important component of success. More precisely, ice hockey team captains are recognized as having a significant leadership role. The purpose of this study was to identify and examine the key leadership behaviors exhibited by athletes, specifically ice hockey team captains. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with six former university male ice hockey team captains. Data were analysed inductively, following the guidelines of Cote, Salmela, and Russell (1995). Three main areas emerged from the data analysis which were called: (a) the interpersonal characteristics and experiences, (b) the social interactions, and (c) the task behaviors. These results identified the influence of background experiences of team captains, the types of behaviors displayed, how the behaviors were manifested, when and where the behaviors were exhibited, and the individuals involved in these behaviors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicProbability and Statistical Research→French-language works237,207→