↓ Skip to main content

Annual Age-Grouping and Athlete Development

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
555 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
452 Mendeley
Title
Annual Age-Grouping and Athlete Development
Published in
Sports Medicine, October 2012
DOI 10.2165/00007256-200939030-00005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen Cobley, Joseph Baker, Nick Wattie, Jim McKenna

Abstract

Annual age-grouping is a common organizational strategy in sport. However, such a strategy appears to promote relative age effects (RAEs). RAEs refer both to the immediate participation and long-term attainment constraints in sport, occurring as a result of chronological age and associated physical (e.g. height) differences as well as selection practices in annual age-grouped cohorts. This article represents the first meta-analytical review of RAEs, aimed to collectively determine (i) the overall prevalence and strength of RAEs across and within sports, and (ii) identify moderator variables. A total of 38 studies, spanning 1984-2007, containing 253 independent samples across 14 sports and 16 countries were re-examined and included in a single analysis using odds ratios and random effects procedures for combining study estimates. Overall results identified consistent prevalence of RAEs, but with small effect sizes. Effect size increased linearly with relative age differences. Follow-up analyses identified age category, skill level and sport context as moderators of RAE magnitude. 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. Researchers need to understand the mechanisms by which RAEs magnify and subside, as well as confirm whether RAEs exist in female and more culturally diverse contexts. To reduce and eliminate this social inequality from influencing athletes' experiences, especially within developmental periods, direct policy, organizational and practitioner intervention is required.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 452 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 5 1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Portugal 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Qatar 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 434 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 88 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 60 13%
Student > Bachelor 53 12%
Student > Postgraduate 30 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 25 6%
Other 97 21%
Unknown 99 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 235 52%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 7%
Psychology 23 5%
Social Sciences 18 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 2%
Other 28 6%
Unknown 109 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 August 2023.
All research outputs
#4,788,678
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,924
of 2,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,849
of 192,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#365
of 831 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.8. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 192,635 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 831 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.