Literature DB >> 34045843

Toward Understanding Youth Athletes' Fun Priorities: An Investigation of Sex, Age, and Levels of Play.

Amanda J Visek1, Heather Mannix1, Avinash Chandran2, Sean D Cleary3, Karen A McDonnell4, Loretta DiPietro1.   

Abstract

Colloquial conjecture asserts perceptions of difference in what is more or less important to youth athletes based on binary categorization, such as sex (girls vs. boys), age (younger vs. older), and level of competitive play (recreational vs. travel). The fun integration theory's FUN MAPS, which identify 11 fun-factors comprised of 81 fun-determinants, offers a robust framework from which to test these conceptions related to fun. Therefore, the purposes of this study were to scientifically explore: (a) the extent to which soccer players' prioritization of the 11 fun-factors and 81 fun-determinants were consistent with the gender differences hypothesis or the gender similarities hypothesis, and (b) how their fun priorities evolved as a function of their age and level of play. Players' (n = 141) data were selected from the larger database that originally informed the conceptualization of the fun integration theory's FUN MAPS. Following selection, innovative pattern match displays and go-zone displays were produced to identify discrete points of consensus and discordance between groups. Regardless of sex, age, or level of play, results indicated extraordinarily high consensus among the players' reported importance of the fun-factors (r = .90-.97) and fun-determinants (r = .92-.93), which were consistently grouped within strata of primary, secondary, and tertiary importance. Overall, results were consistent with the gender similarities hypothesis, thereby providing the first data to dispel common conceptions about what is most fun with respect to sex, in addition to age and level of play, in a sample of youth soccer players.

Entities:  

Keywords:  FUN MAPS; concept mapping; enjoyment; fun integration theory; youth development

Year:  2020        PMID: 34045843      PMCID: PMC8152670          DOI: 10.1123/wspaj.2018-0004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Women Sport Phys Act J        ISSN: 1063-6161


  27 in total

1.  Race and gender on the brain: electrocortical measures of attention to the race and gender of multiply categorizable individuals.

Authors:  Tiffany A Ito; Geoffrey R Urland
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2003-10

Review 2.  The gender similarities hypothesis.

Authors:  Janet Shibley Hyde
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  2005-09

3.  Adolescents' attrition from school-sponsored sports.

Authors:  R H DuRant; R A Pendergrast; J Donner; C Seymore; G Gaillard
Journal:  Am J Dis Child       Date:  1991-10

4.  Influences of competition level, gender, player nationality, career stage and playing position on relative age effects.

Authors:  J Schorer; S Cobley; D Büsch; H Bräutigam; J Baker
Journal:  Scand J Med Sci Sports       Date:  2008-07-08       Impact factor: 4.221

Review 5.  Gender similarities and differences.

Authors:  Janet Shibley Hyde
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 24.137

6.  Adolescent girls' perceived barriers to participation in physical activity.

Authors:  John J M Dwyer; Kenneth R Allison; Ellie R Goldenberg; Allan J Fein; Karen K Yoshida; Marie A Boutilier
Journal:  Adolescence       Date:  2006

7.  The development of children ages 6 to 14.

Authors:  J S Eccles
Journal:  Future Child       Date:  1999

Review 8.  Social cognition: thinking categorically about others.

Authors:  C N Macrae; G V Bodenhausen
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 24.137

9.  Why Are Girls Less Physically Active than Boys? Findings from the LOOK Longitudinal Study.

Authors:  Rohan M Telford; Richard D Telford; Lisa S Olive; Thomas Cochrane; Rachel Davey
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-09       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Gender differences in emotion perception and self-reported emotional intelligence: A test of the emotion sensitivity hypothesis.

Authors:  Agneta H Fischer; Mariska E Kret; Joost Broekens
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.