4.6 Article

Identifying profiles of actual and perceived motor competence among adolescents: associations with motivation, physical activity, and sports participation

期刊

JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES
卷 34, 期 21, 页码 2027-2037

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2016.1149608

关键词

Motor competence; motivation for physicaleducation; physical activity; sports participation; adolescents; person-centred analyses

资金

  1. Flemish research Foundation [1.5.038.13N]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study identified adolescents' motor competence (MC)-based profiles (e.g., high actual and low perceived MC), and accordingly investigated differences in motivation for physical education (PE), physical activity (PA) levels, and sports participation between profiles by using regression analyses. Actual MC was measured with the Korperkoordinationstest fur Kinder. Adolescents (n=215; 66.0% boys; mean age=13.64 +/-.58years) completed validated questionnaires to assess perceived MC, motivation for PE, PA-levels, and sports participation. Actual and perceived MC were only moderately correlated and cluster analyses identified four groups. Two groups of overestimators (low - overestimation, average - overestimation) were identified (51%), who particularly displayed better motivation for PE when compared to their peers who accurately estimated themselves (low - accurate, average - accurate). Moreover, adolescents with low actual MC, but high perceived MC were significantly more active than adolescents with low actual MC who accurately estimated themselves. Results pointed in the same direction for organised sports participation. Underestimators were not found in the current sample, which is positive as underestimation might negatively influence adolescents' motivation to achieve and persist in PA and sports. In conclusion, results emphasise that developing perceived MC, especially among adolescents with low levels of actual MC, seems crucial to stimulate motivation for PE, and engagement in PA and sports.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据