The influence of peer groups in organized sport on female adolescents' identity development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research has indicated that females in adolescence derive an understanding of who they are through the relationships they have with their peers (Harter, 2006; Josselson, 1987). This presentation will review the existing literature related to identity development in early adolescent females and how this development may be influenced by peer groups in organized sport environments. More specifically, this literature will be grounded in Erikson's (1968) theory of Psychosocial Development which provides an overview of the processes adolescents may engage in as they develop their individual identity. In addition, different aspects of peer groups, namely individual friendships and group acceptance, and the possible influence of these aspects on girls' experiences in the sport environment will be discussed. Individual interviews were conducted with female adolescents, aged 15-18. Discussion of the results will include but are not limited to: the influence of individual friendships on the awareness and development of personal characteristics (e.g. hardworking, determined, etc.); the similarities and differences between how an individual may perceive her personal identity in comparison to the ways in which her peers may describe her; and the relationship between friendships and perceptions of personal characteristics (e.g. body image, decision making and sport-specific confidence). Potential directions for future research and practice will be addressed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".