Exploring the Experiences of First-Time Ultramarathon Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, the growing popularity of ultramarathon events (endurance footraces longer than the 42.2km marathon) has attracted a range of participants from elite endurance athletes to recreational runners. Using a phenomenological approach, this study addresses a gap in the existing ultramarathon literature by highlighting experiences of first-time ultramarathon participants. This research builds on our understanding of ultrarunners’ psychology by exploring the development and application of mental skills used by these athletes while training for and competing in an ultramarathon. Eight individuals participated in this study, with data collection taking place at three time-points in their journey via a pre-race questionnaire, post-race journal, and follow-up one-on-one virtual interview. Qualitative data from interview transcripts and journals were analyzed together using reflexive thematic analysis, and results are presented in five major themes: (1) Preparation for the Race, (2) Physical Challenges, (3) Mental Challenges, (4) Relationships and Support, and (5) Personal Transformation. These results highlight a range of mental skills (e.g., goal-setting, imagery, self-talk, and attentional control) used by participants in their first ultramarathon. Barriers and facilitators for developing these skills are discussed (e.g., access to course-specific information). Results suggest that training for and completing in one’s first ultramarathon can be a transformative experience with impacts beyond the sport. The findings from this research have practical applications for athletes, coaches, mental performance consultants, and race directors. It also offers insight on the development of mental skills that has applications beyond the ultramarathon, for example when persevering through other challenging life events.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".