Passion and the expert coach: Impact on life and performance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dual model of passion asserts that passion can be harmonious or obsessive depending on how the passionate activity is internalized into one’s identity (Vallerand, et al., 2003). The purpose of the study was to explore the relationship between expert coaches’ passion for coaching and their performance, health and ability to balance coach and family demands from the perspective of the expert coaches and their partner. The participants in this study were expert coaches working with national team members (i.e., those competing at the Olympics/Paralympics and/or World Championships) and their partners. To create sustainable coaching performance, coaching environments should protect coaches from the negative side effects of obsessive passion through effective planning for recovery. The partner results indicated coach partners are key to coach performance and fully committed to the performance of the expert coach. Further study should examine interventions that protect coaches from the negative outcomes of obsessive passion.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it