MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7056185233

Effects of short term PETTLEP-based cognitive specific imagery intervention on accuracy and efficacy of snap shot shooting of youth ice hockey players

2015· article· en· W7056185233 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Frequency and Time Standards
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce hockeyIntervention (counseling)ClubPsychological interventionTask (project management)Cognition
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies have proven a positive relation between PETTLEP-based imagery intervention and performance and many researchers argue that more studies should investigate its effect on a variety of sports (Holmes and Collins, 2001; Weinberg, 2008). Primary purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of a PETTLEP-based cognitive specific (CS) imagery intervention on performance and efficacy of a sport-specific task on youth hockey players aged between 13-15 years. A total of nine participants from a hockey club in southern Sweden were randomly assigned to an intervention and control group. All participants were administered a structured self-efficacy questionnaire and an adapted sport imagery questionnaire (SIQ) and were also tested for performance on an ice hockey shooting skill to determine baseline performance at the beginning of the experiment. This was followed by a 16-day intervention and at the end of the intervention participants were tested for the same task and administered the SIQ and self-efficacy questionnaire a second time. Although the descriptive statistics illustrated a positive change in performance scores of in intervention group the results from non-parametric tests did not show a significant effect of the intervention for all of the tasks included in the study. Hence, the present study was not able to draw a positive conclusion about PETTLEP-based imagery as previously established by similar studies. The findings of present study highlight the need for further research investigating effects of similar interventions on performance and efficacy of similar tasks in hockey using an improved protocol and a more controlled environment.Acknowledgments: Simon Graner, Erwin Apsitch, Sofia Bunke, Karin Moesch, Jonas Alm, Ulof Nilsson, Germano Gallicchio, Andres Thomsson, Maria Garcia, Pau Casas Bonet, Alexander Von Reppert, Jacob Lee Shafsky, and all players who participated in this study.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.589

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Frequency and Time StandardsFrench-language works237,207