| Literature DB >> 33192949 |
Ambra Gentile1,2, Stefano Boca2, Yolanda Demetriou3, David Sturm3, Simona Pajaujiene4, Ilona Judita Zuoziene4, Fatma Nese Sahin5, Özkan Güler5, Manuel Gómez-López6, Carla Chicau Borrego7, Doris Matosic8, Antonino Bianco2, Marianna Alesi2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Besides the evident positive effect on body development, physical activity has proven to boost executive functions, especially if the exercises are enriched with cognitive stimuli. Previous studies have shown that introducing challenging exercises in the physical activity routine can also enhance motivation. Therefore, enriching a physical education program with cognitively challenging exercises may also foster children's motivation during physical education classes, where the motivation is high at the beginning of the school year and low at the end of it. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to test if a sport program enriched by cognitive stimuli may improve kids' motivation or take them out from a state of amotivation along the school year.Entities:
Keywords: enriched sport program; gender difference; motivation; physical education; social support
Year: 2020 PMID: 33192949 PMCID: PMC7656959 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.601000
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Participants per country distinguished in Control and Intervention groups.
| Intervention | Control | |
| Italy | 77 | 87 |
| Lithuania | 56 | 37 |
| Germany | 38 | 36 |
| Total | 171 | 160 |
Mean and SD of intervention and control groups in pre- and post-test condition.
| Intervention | Control | |||||||
| Pre-test | Post-test | Pre-test | Post-test | |||||
| Intrinsic regulation | 17.70 | 3.02 | 17.30 | 3.47 | 17.60 | 3.13 | 16.30 | 4.64 |
| Identified regulation | 16.30 | 3.20 | 14.10 | 5.95 | 16.0 | 3.35 | 14.80 | 4.71 |
| Introjected regulation | 9.14 | 4.42 | 9.98 | 4.23 | 9.11 | 3.88 | 10.50 | 4.32 |
| External regulation | 7.82 | 3.82 | 8.43 | 3.50 | 7.41 | 3.51 | 8.63 | 3.79 |
| Amotivation | 7.94 | 3.45 | 9.63 | 3.94 | 7.96 | 3.55 | 10.20 | 4.25 |
| Social support from family | 13.60 | 3.17 | 12.90 | 3.73 | 12.10 | 4.10 | 12.40 | 4.16 |
| Social support from friends | 7.99 | 3.11 | 8.38 | 3.34 | 8.14 | 3.26 | 8.32 | 3.26 |
FIGURE 1Intrinsic motivation for ESA Program and control group.
Mean and SD distinguished by gender between pre- and post-test.
| Males | Females | |||||||
| Pre-test | Post-test | Pre-test | Post-test | |||||
| Social support from family | 13.0 | 3.61 | 13.4 | 3.49 | 12.40 | 3.94 | 11.7 | 4.37 |
| Social support from friends | 8.37 | 3.19 | 8.85 | 3.24 | 7.57 | 3.11 | 7.69 | 3.26 |
FIGURE 2Gender differences in perceived social support from family.