Problematic Parents: An Efficacy Analysis of Code of Conduct Policies in Ontario Minor Hockey Associations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Minor hockey in Canada holds significant historical and cultural importance. Many children in Canada aspire to become professional hockey players and many parents dream of their child succeeding in the sport at the highest levels. This perceived importance runs the risk of creating a hypercompetitive environment with overinvolved parents that can adversely affect multiple minor hockey stakeholders, such as young athletes, coaches, referees, administrators, and other parents. Existing research has examined violations from parents in various youth sport settings and a lack of institutional policies to inform, monitor, and discipline parents who violate behavioural expectations. Many studies have recommended the inclusion of parental education tools and association disciplinary procedures, but current literature lacks a fundamental understanding of current behaviour policies and their effectiveness. This study examines the contents of code of conduct policies in Ontario minor hockey associations, the behaviour expectations of parents, the effectiveness of code of conduct policies, the various violations that parents commit, and potential recommendations to improve parental behaviour. Employing constructivist epistemology and qualitative research design, this study used interpretive phenomenology and thematic analysis to analyze two types of data: 58 existing code of conduct documents, and 21 semi-structured interviews with minor hockey rep coaches and administrators. This analysis revealed that while many Ontario minor hockey associations have some form of conduct policy in place, content and implementation varies significantly between associations. Furthermore, while participants perceived that parental behaviour appears to be improving in recent years, misconduct incidents still commonly occur with significant negative consequences to various minor hockey stakeholders. Participants identified many strategies to better prevent and respond to parental misconduct in minor hockey are identified and examined, making this study useful to minor hockey associations in developing better policies and procedures to effectively deal with parental misconduct incidents.
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 | 0.019 | 0.076 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".