Adolescent males at representative level in highly popular sports are most at risk of RAE inequalities¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r? · q3
Currency · newest study 2009 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2014: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q3 i? RAE inequalities appear greatest in sport contexts involving adolescent (aged 15–18 years) males competing at regional and national level in highly popular sports. → Cobley 2009

Evidence¶

Cobley 2009¶

Cobley, S., Baker, J., Wattie, N., McKenna, J. (2009). Annual Age-Grouping and Athlete Development. Sports Med 39, 235–256. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200939030-00005

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?

Follow-up moderator analysis of the pooled samples identified the highest-risk context: "adolescent (aged 15–18 years) males, at the representative (i.e. regional and national) level in highly popular sports". No effect-size value for this subgroup is printed in the available text.

"Sports context involving adolescent (aged 15–18 years) males, at the representative (i.e. regional and national) level in highly popular sports appear most at risk to RAE inequalities."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• RAEs are consistently prevalent across sports but with small effect sizes — a broader claim this one bears on
• RAE effect size increases linearly with relative age differences — related
• Age category, skill level and sport context moderate RAE magnitude — a broader claim this one bears on
• RAE mechanisms and generalization to female and culturally diverse contexts remain unconfirmed research needs — related
• A review reports that relative-age effects tied to cohort cutoff dates bias selection into elite youth soccer and hockey — related