Understanding girls' motivation to participate in sport. the effects of social identity and physical self-concept
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Girls are often less motivated to participate in recreational sport compared to boys. Having a strong social identity with a sports team is positively associated with motivation to continue participation in sport, which is perhaps explained by the positive effect social identity has on the self-concept. Specifically, a positive physical self-concept encourages motivation to participate in sport. Therefore, we examine whether the relationship between social identity and motivation is mediated by perceptions of the physical self. Method: We use a sample of girl badminton athletes to examine how the team environment shapes physical self-concept, and whether this association relates to motivation to participate in badminton. One hundred and fifty girls completed the Social Identity in Sport Questionnaire, the physical self-concept questionnaire, and items from the Behaviour Regulation in Sport Questionnaire. Two mediation models were fit to examine whether perceptions of the physical self-mediated the relationship between social identity and internal motivation and external motivation. Results: Physical self-concept partially mediated the relationship between social identity and internal motivation. The bootstrapped unstandardized indirect effect was .06, 95% CI(.01, .14). Physical self-concept fully mediated the relationship between social identity and external motivation. The bootstrapped unstandardized indirect effect was -.13, 95% CI(-.29, -.02) Discussion: These results highlight the importance of the group context in relation to individual self-concept and motivation. Overall, targeting aspects of the team environment may be an important strategy to improve girls' perceptions of their physical self, and in turn improve motivation to continue sport participation.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".