Social identity and resilience in competitive youth sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organized youth sport has been identified as important for the promotion of positive mental health (Vella, 2019). A growing body of research in sport tied to positive mental health focuses on the processes through which youth define and internalize the sport teams to which they belong – called social identity (Vella et al. 2021). Through elevated social identity, individuals experience greater psychological connection to fellow group members, receive social support, and develop a sense of meaning and purpose (Haslam et al., 2011). This study tested how social identity associated with an athlete’s sport team relates to one indicator of positive mental health – resilience. A total of 163 competitive youth soccer players (Mage = 14.71, 55% Female, 57% White) completed measures of social identity (ingroup ties, cognitive centrality, and ingroup affect; Bruner & Benson, 2018) and resilience (Connor & Davidson, 2003). Results of a multiple linear regression highlighted a positive relationship between social identity and resilience (F(3, 159) = 5.52, p = .001), accounting for 8% of the variance. In terms of specific predictors, ingroup ties perceptions steered this relationship as the lone significant individual predictor (β = .19, 95% CI [.01, .23], p = .03). Collectively, the results support and extend recent social identity and mental health findings in an adult sport setting (Fransen et al., 2022). When athletes experience greater social identity with their team, in particular the bonding and belongingness with other group members, they also feel more capable of overcoming the barriers they face in everyday life.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".