Citation: David Melkuev, Danqiao Guo, Tony S. Wirjanto. Applications of random-matrix theory and nonparametric change-point analysis to three notable systemic crises[J]. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2018, 2(2): 413-467. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2018.2.413
| [1] | Richard Bailey, Claude Scheuer . The COVID-19 pandemic as a fortuitous disruptor in physical education: the case of active homework. AIMS Public Health, 2022, 9(2): 423-439. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2022029 |
| [2] | Saleem Qureshi, Musarrat Iqbal, Azra Rafiq, Hamna Ahmed, Tooba Malik, Muhammad Nasir Kalam, Muhammad Abdullah, Qirtas Tauheed, Muhammad Daoud Butt . Dietary habits and physical activity patterns in relation to nutritional status among school-aged children in Pakistan: A cross-sectional study. AIMS Public Health, 2023, 10(3): 553-567. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2023039 |
| [3] | Clemens Drenowatz, Gerson Ferrari, Klaus Greier, Sitong Chen, Franz Hinterkörner . Physical fitness in Austrian elementary school children prior to and post-COVID-19. AIMS Public Health, 2023, 10(2): 480-495. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2023034 |
| [4] | Klaus Greier, Clemens Drenowatz, Theresa Bischofer, Gloria Petrasch, Carla Greier, Armando Cocca, Gerhard Ruedl . Physical activity and sitting time prior to and during COVID-19 lockdown in Austrian high-school students. AIMS Public Health, 2021, 8(3): 531-540. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2021043 |
| [5] | Erivelton Fernandes França, Michel Monteiro Macedo, Fernando Francisco Pazello Mafra, Gabrielle Mitico Miyake, Romildo Torres da Silva, Tania Regina de França, Thyago Ribeiro dos Santos, João Pedro da Silva Junior, Victor Keihan Rodrigues Matsudo, Nelson Morini Junior, Eduardo Natali Della Valentina, Fábio Dupart Nascimento, Rodrigo Álvaro Brandão Lopes Martins . Back pain in elementary schoolchildren is related to screen habits. AIMS Public Health, 2020, 7(3): 562-573. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020045 |
| [6] | Rosalie Allison, Emma L. Bird, Stuart McClean . Is Team Sport the Key to Getting Everybody Active, Every Day? A Systematic Review of Physical Activity Interventions Aimed at Increasing Girls’ Participation in Team Sport. AIMS Public Health, 2017, 4(2): 202-220. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2017.2.202 |
| [7] | Elin Sandström, Ingrid Bolmsjö, Ellis Janzon . Attitudes to and Experiences of Physical Activity among Migrant Women from Former Yugoslavia——a qualitative interview study about physical activity and its beneficial effect on heart health, in Malmö, Sweden. AIMS Public Health, 2015, 2(2): 194-209. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2015.2.194 |
| [8] | Sigma Bhattarai, Chet Kant Bhusal . Prevalence and associated factors of malnutrition among school going adolescents of Dang district, Nepal. AIMS Public Health, 2019, 6(3): 291-306. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2019.3.291 |
| [9] | Wanda M. Williams, Michelle M. Yore, Melicia C. Whitt-Glover . Estimating physical activity trends among blacks in the United States through examination of four national surveys. AIMS Public Health, 2018, 5(2): 144-157. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2018.2.144 |
| [10] | James Matthews, Aidan P Moran, Amanda M Hall . The feasibility of a theory-based self-regulation intervention in schools to increase older adolescents’ leisure time physical activity behavior. AIMS Public Health, 2018, 5(4): 421-439. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2018.4.421 |
Regular physical activity (PA) is a key determinant of both physical and psychosocial health. In children and adolescents, PA has been associated with a healthy body weight, cardiometabolic health, bone strength, physical fitness as well as academic performance and overall quality of life [1],[2]. Current PA guidelines recommend at least 60 minutes per day of moderate to vigorous PA for children and adolescents, including at least 3 days per week with vigorous PA and muscle and bone strengthening activities [1],[3]. Only 20% of adolescents, however, meet these recommendations [4], while engagement in sedentary activities (e.g., computer games, television use, etc.) has been increasing [5],[6]. This shift in behavioral choices has significant implications for public health as insufficient PA among adolescents is considered a leading risk factor for excess body weight, non-communicable diseases, and mental health disorders, which may lead to chronic health problems in adulthood [7]–[9]. As a result, the global healthcare costs of physical inactivity are estimated to exceed $300 billion by 2030 [10].
Adolescence provides a critical window of opportunity for the promotion of an active and healthy lifestyle. Research has shown that school-based PA contributes to higher PA levels among youth and later in life [11],[12]. Physical education (PE), which refers to the structured implementation of PA within the school context, is considered one of the most cost-effective strategies for promoting PA in youth and the next generation of adults [13],[14]. As PE is part of the curriculum in many countries [15], it can reach a majority of adolescents irrespective of socio-economic background. In fact, it has been argued that for many children and adolescents, school represents the only opportunity for regular PA [16]. Furthermore, schools have been estimated to be the primary source of PA for 80% of adolescents, which has been attributed to parental concerns about safety during free play and economic pressures that may limit access to club sports [17]. PE provides an opportunity for structured PA that includes a variety of activities, such as team and individual games and sports, as well as dance, and is usually led by qualified and accountable teachers in order to promote a healthy and active lifestyle [15]. In addition, PE plays an important role in the development of physical fitness and well-being and contributes to the psychological and social development and physical health of adolescents [2],[18],[19]. As the primary institutional setting for motor development and PA in children and adolescents [2], PE plays a crucial role in building fundamental movement skills, which are essential for lifelong PA and sports participation. Notably, a lack of PE exposure in school has been linked to an increased risk of physical inactivity in adulthood [20]–[22].
In order to experience the previously mentioned benefits, sustained active engagement in PE is necessary. Accordingly, a positive attitude towards PE appears to be an important contributor for PE participation, which has been shown to positively affect leisure time PA as well [23]–[26]. In fact, intervention programs targeting attitude towards PA have been shown to increase time spent in moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) during PE [23]. Even though PE is one of the most popular subjects in schools [27],[28], there are individual differences in the perception and benefits of PE. For example, PE was valued more favorably among males and those of younger age [27],[29],[30]. Additionally, more physically active youth and those with higher skill levels generally rate PE more positively than their less-skilled peers [31]. Results on the association between weight status and attitudes towards PE, on the other hand, have been equivocal [28],[29]. These studies, however, were conducted prior to the implementation of COVID-19 restrictions, which had a significant impact on teaching modes, PA, and physical fitness [32]–[35]. Given the important role in the promotion of an active and healthy lifestyle, further research on correlates of PE engagement is needed. The present study, therefore, examined attitudes towards and perceived importance of PE among 10- to 17-year-old secondary school students and the association with sex, age, and weight status.
Out of 10 public schools that combine middle and high school (grades 5 to 12) in the Federal State of Tyrol, 5 schools (50% of available schools) were selected via a random number generator. In order to obtain a representative sample, a similar number of middle schools (grades 5 to 8) were randomly selected as well. Elementary schools were not invited to participate, as PE in grades 1 through 4 is taught by the regular classroom teacher, rather than a specialized PE teacher.
In Austrian secondary schools, there are 3 class periods (50 minutes per period) of mandatory PE per week in grades 5 through 8 and 2 class periods (50 minutes per period) of mandatory PE per week in higher grades, which are taught by college-educated, specialized PE teachers. The standardized curriculum consists of a variety of activities, including ball games, gymnastics, swimming, and winter sports, as well as strength and conditioning. In addition to the development of motor competence and an understanding of basic training principles, social and self-competence are emphasized. Given the variety of activities, teachers have some flexibility on the specific content of the class and how key competencies are addressed.
All schools that were contacted agreed to participate in the study and the study protocol was approved by the University of Innsbruck Institutional Review Board. Parents or legal guardians provided written informed consent prior to data collection, and participants provided oral assent at the time of data collection. A total of 3011 adolescents (47.5% female) with an average age of 13.2 ± 2.1 years completed the questionnaire. To assess potential changes in the attitude towards PE throughout adolescence, participants were categorized into 4 age groups: 10–11 years, 12–13 years, 14–15 years, and >15 years.
Attitudes towards and perceived importance of PE were assessed using a standardized questionnaire, which has been used previously [27]. The questionnaire was developed by experts and was tested prior to its initial implementation to ensure that the included statements were understandable for the target age group. Data collection occurred between April and June 2024 at the beginning of a regular PE class between 9:00 am and 12:00 pm in the schools' gymnasium. The questionnaire was administered by a researcher in a quiet atmosphere, and completion took between 5 and 10 minutes. Specifically, participants rated their agreement with 6 statements regarding the perceived importance of PE and its effect on health and well-being, motivation towards PE, their relationship with the PE teacher, and their perceived competence in PE using a four-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to completely agree. In addition, they were asked to evaluate the importance of PE in relation to other subjects using 3 answer options (less important, equally important, more important). Answers were converted to numeric data with a value of 1 indicating strongly disagree or less important and a value of 4 indicating completely agree or more important.
Prior to completing the questionnaire, body height and weight were measured according to standard procedures, with participants wearing sports clothes and no shoes. Body height was measured to the nearest 0.1 cm using a mobile stadiometer (SECA® 217, Seca; Germany), and body weight was measured to the nearest 0.1 kg using a calibrated scale (SECA® 803, Seca; Germany). Subsequently, body mass index (BMI, kg/m²) was calculated and converted to BMI percentiles (BMIPCT) using German reference values [36]. BMIPCT were used to classify participants as underweight (BMIPCT < 10), normal weight (10 ≤ BMIPCT ≤ 90) or overweight/obese (BMIPCT > 90).
Descriptive statistics are reported as means with standard deviations for continuous data, while prevalence rates are reported for categorical data. Sex differences in anthropometric characteristics were examined via ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to examine differences in attitudes towards and perceived importance of PE. Differences across weight status and age categories were examined via Kruskal-Wallis tests separately for boys and girls. Statistical analyses were performed with SPSS 29.0 (Armonk, NY, USA) with the significance set at p < 0.05 and Bonferroni adjustment was applied for multiple comparisons.
A total of 1429 female and 1582 male participants between 10 and 17 years of age provided complete data. Across the entire sample, 31.0% were in the 12–13-year age group, 26.5% were in the 10–11-year group, and 23.9% were in the 14–15-year group. The remaining participants (18.6%) were 15 years or older. Almost three quarters (73.2%) of the participants were normal weight, 17.7% were considered as overweight/obese, and 9.1% were considered as underweight. There were no sex differences in age, but boys were significantly taller and heavier than girls (Table 1). Boys also had higher BMI percentiles than girls, but there were no significant sex differences across weight categories.
| Project | Total sample n = 3011 |
Female only n = 1429 |
Male only n = 1582 |
| Age (years) | 13.2 ± 2.1 | 13.1 ± 2.1 | 13.2 ± 2.1 |
| Height (cm)* | 160.8 ± 12.3 | 158.6 ± 10.1 | 162.7 ± 13.8 |
| Body Weight (kg)* | 52.4 ± 14.7 | 50.9 ± 13.5 | 53.8 ± 15.6 |
| BMI Percentile* | 53.7 ± 29.8 | 52.0 ± 30.3 | 55.1 ± 29.2 |
| Normal Weight (%) | 73.2 | 72.6 | 73.8 |
| Overweight/Obese (%) | 17.7 | 17.1 | 18.3 |
| Underweight (%) | 9.1 | 10.3 | 8.0 |
Note: * sig. sex difference, p < 0.01.
DownLoad:
CSV
The majority of adolescents (78.5%) mostly or completely agreed that PE was important to them, and 84.3% reported that PE positively affected their health and well-being. PE also motivated more than two thirds of the participants (68.4%) to engage in exercise or PA during leisure time. A total of 68.6% considered themselves to be good at sports, and 91.0% had a good relationship with their PE teacher. There was also a large preference for daily PE (69.9%) even though less than half of the participants (41.9%) considered PE to be more important than other subjects (Table 2). While both male and female participants displayed a positive attitude towards PE with more than 50% agreeing mostly or completely with the respective statements, the agreement rate was higher in boys compared to girls (p < 0.01).
| Project | Completely Agree | Mostly Agree | Mostly Disagree | Completely Disagree | |
| PE is important to me.* | TOTAL | 43.0 | 35.5 | 17.5 | 4.0 |
| FEMALE | 35.8 | 38.9 | 20.6 | 4.7 | |
| MALE | 49.5 | 32.4 | 14.7 | 3.4 | |
| PE positively affects my health and well-being.* | TOTAL | 43.8 | 40.5 | 13.5 | 6.6 |
| FEMALE | 36.0 | 45.0 | 16.6 | 2.4 | |
| MALE | 50.8 | 36.3 | 10.6 | 2.2 | |
| PE motivates me to engage in exercise/PA during leisure time.* | TOTAL | 30.9 | 37.5 | 25.0 | 6.6 |
| FEMALE | 20.2 | 40.9 | 33.1 | 5.9 | |
| MALE | 40.6 | 34.5 | 17.7 | 7.3 | |
| I would like to have PE daily.* | TOTAL | 41.6 | 28.3 | 21.4 | 8.7 |
| FEMALE | 30.6 | 33.3 | 26.2 | 9.9 | |
| MALE | 51.5 | 23.8 | 17.1 | 7.6 | |
| I have a good relationship with my PE teacher.* | TOTAL | 54.9 | 36.1 | 7.6 | 1.4 |
| FEMALE | 47.8 | 40.4 | 10.0 | 1.7 | |
| MALE | 61.4 | 32.1 | 5.4 | 1.1 | |
| I consider myself to be good in sports.* | TOTAL | 30.9 | 37.7 | 25.6 | 5.8 |
| FEMALE | 22.0 | 36.8 | 33.3 | 7.8 | |
| MALE | 38.8 | 38.5 | 18.6 | 4.0 | |
| More Important | Equally Important | Less mportant | |||
| Importance of PE compared to other subjects.* | TOTAL | 41.9 | 41.7 | 16.3 | |
| FEMALE | 35.4 | 44.6 | 19.9 | ||
| MALE | 47.9 | 39.1 | 13.1 | ||
Note: * sig. sex difference, p < 0.01.
DownLoad:
CSV
| Project | Completely Agree | Mostly Agree | Mostly Disagree | Completely Disagree | |||||
| Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | ||
| PE is important to me. | 10–11 yrs | 64.3 | 70.5 | 27.3 | 24.8 | 7.6 | 4.2 | 0.8 | 0.5 |
| 12–13 yrs | 38.7 | 56.6 | 51.2 | 34.0 | 9.5 | 7.3 | 0.7 | 2.1 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 17.8 | 37.8 | 43.7 | 36.5 | 32.9 | 20.6 | 5.5 | 5.1 | |
| >15 yrs | 9.1 | 25.7 | 28.7 | 34.5 | 45.3 | 32.6 | 16.9 | 7.2 | |
| PE positively affects my health and well-being.1,2,a | 10–11 yrs | 53.2 | 66.6 | 34.9 | 27.0 | 9.6 | 4.7 | 2.3 | 1.7 |
| 12–13 yrs | 45.1 | 62.7 | 43.7 | 29.1 | 10.1 | 6.7 | 1.1 | 1.5 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 19.7 | 43.9 | 53.8 | 41.4 | 21.5 | 12.9 | 4.9 | 1.8 | |
| >15 yrs | 13.8 | 20.5 | 51.6 | 53.4 | 32.7 | 21.5 | 2.0 | 4.6 | |
| PE motivates me to engage in exercise/PA during leisure time.1,a | 10–11 yrs | 31.6 | 51.5 | 42.0 | 32.7 | 20.8 | 12.9 | 5.6 | 3.0 |
| 12–13 yrs | 24.8 | 45.7 | 43.5 | 37.3 | 27.7 | 13.6 | 4.0 | 3.4 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 11.1 | 34.3 | 41.8 | 36.0 | 40.3 | 19.3 | 6.8 | 10.4 | |
| >15 yrs | 5.5 | 26.4 | 33.1 | 30.3 | 52.8 | 28.3 | 8.7 | 15.0 | |
| I would like to have PE daily. | 10–11 yrs | 54.4 | 71.3 | 32.9 | 21.0 | 7.8 | 4.5 | 4.8 | 3.2 |
| 12–13 yrs | 35.6 | 54.1 | 39.8 | 26.2 | 20.7 | 14.5 | 4.0 | 5.2 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 12.0 | 44.9 | 34.8 | 22.1 | 41.2 | 25.6 | 12.0 | 7.4 | |
| >15 yrs | 8.3 | 30.0 | 20.5 | 26.1 | 45.7 | 26.7 | 25.6 | 17.3 | |
| I have a good relationship with my PE teacher.1,2,c | 10–11 yrs | 62.3 | 66.8 | 26.1 | 25.2 | 8.4 | 7.2 | 3.3 | 0.7 |
| 12–13 yrs | 50.3 | 61.8 | 41.1 | 31.2 | 7.9 | 5.2 | 0.7 | 1.7 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 39.1 | 63.5 | 49.2 | 32.0 | 10.8 | 3.3 | 0.9 | 1.3 | |
| >15 yrs | 31.9 | 50.8 | 50.4 | 42.7 | 15.4 | 5.9 | 2.4 | 0.7 | |
| I consider myself to be good in sports.a | 10–11 yrs | 33.4 | 48.0 | 44.6 | 36.1 | 19.0 | 13.9 | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| 12–13 yrs | 27.5 | 44.0 | 37.6 | 36.9 | 31.2 | 14.9 | 3.7 | 4.2 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 10.8 | 34.5 | 35.7 | 40.9 | 45.2 | 19.4 | 8.3 | 5.1 | |
| >15 yrs | 9.1 | 24.1 | 24.8 | 41.0 | 44.1 | 29.6 | 22.0 | 5.2 | |
| More Important | Equally Important | Less Important | |||||||
| Importance of PE compared to other subjects.1 | 10–11 yrs | 52.2 | 65.6 | 41.3 | 29.7 | 6.6 | 4.7 | ||
| 12–13 yrs | 44.0 | 52.0 | 46.6 | 39.2 | 9.5 | 8.8 | |||
| 14–15 yrs | 20.0 | 43.7 | 48.0 | 39.1 | 32.0 | 17.3 | |||
| >15 yrs | 13.8 | 23.5 | 42.1 | 51.1 | 44.1 | 25.4 | |||
Note: sig. differences across all age groups except for: 1/a no difference between 10–11 years and 12–13 years in girls (1) or boys (a); 2/b no difference between 14–15 years and >15 years in girls (2) or boys (b); c only >15 years sig. different from other age groups in boys.
DownLoad:
CSV
Attitudes towards PE by age:
There was a significant difference in the attitude towards and perceived importance of PE across age groups in girls and boys (p < 0.01). Specifically, the perceived importance of PE and the preference for daily PE differed significantly across all age groups in both girls and boys (p < 0.01) (Table 3). Among girls, there was also a significant difference between all age groups concerning their perceived sports abilities, while there was no difference between the younger age groups in boys. Further, there was no difference in the perceived positive effects of PE on health and well-being among boys between 10 and 13 years of age. The motivation of PE for leisure time exercise/PA did not differ between the ages 10 and 13 among both girls and boys, while it significantly declined after the age of 13 (p < 0.01). Among girls there was a significant age difference for the perceived positive effects of PE on health and well-being and their relationship with the PE teacher between 10- to 13-year-olds and those 15 years and older. Similarly, the perceived importance of PE did not differ among 10- to 13-year-old girls, while there was a significant difference across all age groups in boys (p < 0.01).
Overall, the perceived importance of PE, its impact on health and well-being, and the perception of their own abilities in sports declined significantly with increasing age in boys and girls (p < 0.01). There was also a significant decline, albeit at a high level, regarding a good relationship with their PE teacher among girls (p < 0.01), while no significant change was observed among boys (Figure 1). Girls further displayed a more pronounced decline in their attitude towards PE with less than 40% of girls above 15 years of age considering PE to be important or feeling that PE motivates them for engagement in exercise/PA during leisure time. Furthermore, less than 30% of girls above 15 years of age would like to have daily PE and only 33.9% considered themselves to be good at sports compared to prevalences above 70.0% and 69.0%, respectively, in the younger age groups. Among boys, on the other hand, the agreement with the respective statements remained above 50% across all age groups.
Attitude towards PE by weight status:
Both, male and female adolescents with overweight/obesity considered PE to be less important than their peers and were less likely support daily PE compared to their peers (p < 0.01) (Table 4). Boys with overweight/obesity displayed a lower perception of health benefits of PE (p = 0.04). In girls, on the other hand, underweight was associated with a higher health perception of PE (p = 0.04). There was no difference in the motivation of PE for active leisure time choices in girls, while boys with overweight/obesity were less likely to consider PE to be motivating for leisure time exercise/PA (p < 0.01). Adolescents with overweight/obesity also were less likely to consider themselves to be good at sports (p < 0.01), and they were less likely to report a good relationship with their PE teacher (p = 0.02 among girls and p = 0.04 among boys) (Figure 2).
| Project | Completely Agree | Mostly Agree | Mostly Disagree | Completely Disagree | |||||
| Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | ||
| PE is important to me.1,2,a,b | Underweight | 42.9 | 60.3 | 36.7 | 27.0 | 17.7 | 10.3 | 2.7 | 2.4 |
| Normal weight | 37.0 | 52.0 | 38.3 | 30.9 | 19.8 | 13.6 | 4.9 | 3.4 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 26.1 | 34.6 | 42.9 | 40.5 | 26.1 | 21.1 | 4.9 | 3.8 | |
| PE positively affects my health and well-being.2,3,a,b | Underweight | 44.2 | 57.9 | 44.2 | 27.0 | 11.6 | 10.3 | 0.0 | 4.8 |
| Normal weight | 36.7 | 52.1 | 43.4 | 36.2 | 16.9 | 10.0 | 3.0 | 1.7 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 27.8 | 42.6 | 52.2 | 41.2 | 18.4 | 13.1 | 1.6 | 3.1 | |
| PE motivates me to engage in exercise/ PA during leisure time.a | Underweight | 24.5 | 38.9 | 40.8 | 41.3 | 25.9 | 11.1 | 8.8 | 8.7 |
| Normal weight | 20.7 | 42.6 | 40.4 | 35.1 | 33.4 | 15.2 | 5.5 | 7.1 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 15.1 | 33.2 | 42.9 | 28.7 | 36.3 | 30.8 | 5.7 | 7.3 | |
| I would like to have PE daily.1,2,a,b | Underweight | 41.5 | 54.8 | 31.3 | 23.8 | 17.0 | 13.5 | 10.2 | 7.9 |
| Normal weight | 31.4 | 55.5 | 34.1 | 22.7 | 25.2 | 15.6 | 9.3 | 6.2 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 20.4 | 33.9 | 31.0 | 28.4 | 36.3 | 24.6 | 12.2 | 13.1 | |
| I have a good relationship with my PE teacher.1,a,b | Underweight | 50.3 | 61.1 | 40.8 | 31.7 | 7.5 | 6.3 | 1.4 | 0.8 |
| Normal weight | 49.6 | 64.3 | 38.6 | 31.0 | 10.1 | 3.7 | 1.7 | 1.0 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 38.8 | 49.8 | 48.2 | 36.7 | 11.0 | 11.8 | 2.0 | 1.7 | |
| I consider myself to be good in sports.1,2,3,a,b | Underweight | 49.0 | 46.8 | 34.0 | 32.5 | 12.9 | 16.7 | 4.1 | 4.0 |
| Normal weight | 21.6 | 44.1 | 38.7 | 39.8 | 34.1 | 13.4 | 5.6 | 2.7 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 7.8 | 13.8 | 30.6 | 35.6 | 42.0 | 40.8 | 19.6 | 9.7 | |
| More Important | Equally Important | Less Important | |||||||
| Importance of PE compared to other subjects.1,a | Underweight | 34.0 | 48.4 | 49.0 | 37.3 | 17.0 | 14.3 | ||
| Normal weight | 37.5 | 49.3 | 42.8 | 39.2 | 19.7 | 11.5 | |||
| Overweight/Obese | 27.3 | 41.5 | 49.8 | 39.4 | 22.9 | 19.0 | |||
Note: 1 sig. difference between normal weight and overweight/obese girls; 2 sig. difference between underweight and overweight/obese girls; 3 sig. difference between underweight and normal weight girls; a sig. difference between normal weight and overweight/obese boys; b sig. difference between underweight and overweight/obese boys.
DownLoad:
CSV
Given the potential impact of PE in the promotion of an active lifestyle among adolescents and later in life, the present study examined the attitudes towards and perceived importance of PE among Austrian middle- and high-school students. The results indicated that adolescents generally rated PE positively, though there was a decline in the perceived value of PE as age increased. Boys displayed a more positive attitude towards PE compared to girls, and the decline in the positive attitude and perceived importance with increasing age was more pronounced among girls. In addition to sex and age, significant differences were observed across weight categories. Adolescents with overweight/obesity displayed a less positive attitude towards PE, although there was no difference in the perceived health benefits of PE. Participants with overweight/obesity also considered themselves less skilled in sports, but only boys reported that PE was less motivating for leisure time PA compared to their peers. Despite a generally good relationship with their PE teacher (>86% agreement in any weight category), fewer boys with overweight/obesity reported a good relationship with their PE teacher compared to their peers, while no such difference was observed in girls.
Consistent with the findings of the present study, PE has been shown to be a popular subject among adolescents in previous studies [25],[28]. Studies examining sex differences in attitudes towards and the perceived importance of PE, however, have yielded mixed results [25],[28],[37],[38]. It can, therefore, be argued that differences in the perception of PE between boys and girls may be attributed to the content of PE rather than differences in motivation towards PA in general. Available research indicates that boys prefer competitive team sports and challenging activities that include an element of risk, while girls tend to prefer less competitive fitness activities or dance that have a stronger social component [39],[40]. Biological and behavioral differences that generally result in greater strength and endurance, as well as better hand-eye coordination in boys, may further contribute to a higher perceived competence in PE among boys [41], which could contribute to their preference of competitive activities [42]. In addition, it should be considered that girls mature, on average, earlier than boys, and physiological and psychological changes along with alterations in body image may lead to shifts in attitudes towards PE [30]. Such differences need to be to be considered in the selection of activities during PE. Furthermore, girls reported that fitness activities are more likely to transfer into adulthood compared to traditional sports [39]. Fitness infusion interventions that include circuit training or high-intensity interval training, have also been associated with larger improvements in body composition [43], which may facilitate a sustained engagement in PA. A focus on health and fitness, rather than competitive sports, therefore, could provide more enjoyable experiences during PE among girls, which may lead to similar attitudes towards PE as observed in boys.
A similar argument can be made regarding the observed differences in attitudes towards and the perceived importance of PE across weight categories. While adolescents with overweight/obesity perceived PE to be less important than their peers, there was no difference in the perceived health benefits of PE across weight categories. Other studies also showed an inverse association between the preference for PE and body weight [28] or body fat and enjoyment of PE [44]. Specifically, bullying or disrespect may lead to a feeling of hostility in PE among youth with excess body weight [45]. Enjoyment of PA in general, however, did not differ between adolescents with excess body weight and their peers [46]. It can, therefore, be argued that inappropriate lesson planning and poor teaching strategies may be key contributors to poorer attitudes towards PE in adolescents with excess body weight rather than a lack of interest or motivation towards PA [47],[48]. Negative experiences stemming from a perceived lack of ability may contribute to negative perceptions of PE. A stronger emphasis on the mastery of personal goals rather than external competition and active engagement of the teacher, on the other hand, have been shown to increase motivation and excitement towards PE [28]. PE classes that focus on individual or team development rather than competition, along with outdoor activities, also have resulted in the highest PA levels [9]. Furthermore, high-intensity interval training has been shown to improve health-related physical fitness in overweight or obese youth [49]. As excess body weight has been associated with a lower participation in club sports [50],[51], PE may be the only setting for structured PA in adolescents with overweight/obesity. It is, therefore, crucial to provide positive experiences during PE [52],[53], which could encourage a more active lifestyle among this group.
Considering that an important aspect of PE is the promotion of an active lifestyle, it is concerning that the positive attitude towards PE has been consistently shown to decline with increasing age during adolescence [25],[29]. A potential reason for the decline could be the repetitive nature of activities performed, which may lead to a lack of challenge and boredom during PE [25]. Additionally, cognitive and socio-emotional development most likely contribute to changes in attitudes towards PE as self-competence and task values associated with PA have been shown to decline with increasing age during adolescence [54]. As adolescents mature, it becomes increasingly important to engage them in activities that provide personal meaning to facilitate sustainable PA participation. The integration of individual activities rather than traditional team sports along with diverse activities have been suggested to contribute to sustained interest in PE [25],[55]. As research has shown that adolescents engage in and participate in activities in which they feel competent, as well as those that are considered to be important [56],[57], it is important to emphasize the value of PA and foster a belief that success is possible if sufficient effort is provided. This will enhance attitudes towards PE as adolescents move closer towards adulthood [56]. A higher perceived competence has also been associated with greater participation in leisure time PA [42],[58], which can support a more active lifestyle later in life.
The importance of facilitating leisure time PA is further emphasized by the fact that quality-based PE interventions have been associated with greater benefits for health-related fitness and body composition compared to increasing the number of PE lessons [9],[43]. Specifically, the implementation of direct instruction teaching methods that focus on improving fundamental movement skills has been suggested as the most effective strategy to increase PA in youth [43]. This requires highly qualified teachers who are proficient in classroom organization and management. In addition, to sufficient activity time, constructive feedback and reflection appear to be critical, along with the establishment of consistent routines during PE classes [9]. Mastery-focused approaches in PE have also been shown to contribute to the development of physical literacy and lifelong physical activity skills that facilitate long-term enjoyment and PA independence [9],[59].
Some limitations of the present study, however, should be considered when interpreting the results of this study. Given the nature of the study, the data consist of self-reported information, which carries an inherent risk of bias and may limit objectivity. Body weight and height, on the other hand, were measured, allowing for a more accurate estimation of weight status than self-reported information. Further, no information was available on socioeconomic status, parental education, or the participants' physical activity level, all of which could affect attitudes towards PE. Engagement in PE or the content of PE was not assessed either, but attendance is mandatory in Austria and teachers are supposed to follow a standardized curriculum. It should also be considered that cross-sectional data were used in examining age related differences. Additional research using longitudinal data, along with the assessment of potential confounding variables, therefore, is needed to examine changes over time in the respective variables more clearly in order to enhance the understanding of the role of PE for the promotion of an active and healthy lifestyle. Despite these limitations, the large sample size and inclusion of both pre- and post-pubertal adolescents, however, provide valuable insights into adolescents' perceived importance of and attitudes towards PE, which can significantly influence their future life choices.
The findings of this study highlight the important role of PE in promoting an active lifestyle, as more than two-thirds of the participants reported that PE motivates them to engage in leisure time PA. In addition, PE is a popular subject among adolescents even though girls, as well as those with higher body weight and older age, have been shown to display a lower attitude towards PE and consider it to be less important than their peers. These groups, however, may be particularly dependent on PE to ensure regular PA, due to a lack of other opportunities [29]. It is, therefore, essential to provide quality PE that considers different motives for participation when designing PE curricula and to incorporate activities that engage all students. In addition, active teacher engagement and the facilitation of positive experiences by including elements of challenge and success, as well as joyful activities that contribute to the development of motor competence, appear to be critical to ensure positive attitudes towards PE and PA in general, which promote an active lifestyle.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
| [1] | lez R, Bouchaud JP (2011) Individual and collective stock dynamics: intraday seasonalities. New J Phys 13: 345–349. |
| [2] |
Anderson TW (1963) Asymptotic theory for principal component analysis. Ann Math Stat 34: 122– 148. doi: 10.1214/aoms/1177704248
|
| [3] | Andersson E, Bock D, Fris´en M (2004) Detection of turning points in business cycles. J Bus Cycle Manage Anal 1: 93–108. |
| [4] |
Andersson E, Bock D, Fris´en M (2006) Some statistical aspects of methods for detection of turning points in business cycles. J Appl Stat 33: 257–278. doi: 10.1080/02664760500445517
|
| [5] |
Andrews DWK, Lee I, Ploberger W (1996) Optimal changepoint tests for normal linear regression. J Econometrics 70: 9–38. doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(94)01682-8
|
| [6] |
Ang A, Chen J (2002) Asymmetric correlations of equity portfolios. J Financ Econ 63: 443–494. doi: 10.1016/S0304-405X(02)00068-5
|
| [7] | Bai Z, Zhou W (2008) Large sample covariance matrices without independence structures in columns. Stat Sinica 18: 425–442. |
| [8] | Bai ZD, Silverstein JW (2010) Spectral Analysis of Large Dimensional Random Matrices, Second Edition, Springer, New York. |
| [9] | Basserville M, Nikiforov I (1993) Detection of Abrupt Changes: Theory and Applications. Prentice- Hall, Englewood Cli_s, NJ. |
| [10] | Beibel M, Lerche HR (2000) A new look at optimal stopping problems related to mathematical finance. Stat Sinica 7: 93–108. |
| [11] | Bejan A (2005) Largest eigenvalues and sample covariance matrices. M.Sc. dissertation, Department of Statistics, The University of Warwick. |
| [12] | Berkes I, Gombay E, Horv´ath L, et al. (2004) Sequential change-point detection in GARCH(p,q) models. Economet Theor 20: 1140–1167. |
| [13] |
Biely C, Thurner S (2008) Random matrix ensembles of time-lagged correlation matrices: derivation of eigenvalue spectra and analysis of financial time-series. Quant Financ 8: 705–722. doi: 10.1080/14697680701691477
|
| [14] | Bijlsma M, Klomp J, Duineveld S (2010) Systemic risk in the financial sector: A review and synthesis. CPB Netherland Bureau of Economic Policy Analysis Paper 210. |
| [15] |
Billio M, Getmansky M, Lo AW, et al. (2012) Econometric measures of connectedness and systemic risk in the finance and insurance sectors. J Financ Economet 104: 535–559. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.12.010
|
| [16] |
Bouchaud JP, Potters M (2001) More stylized facts of financial markets: leverage effect and downside correlations. Physica A 299: 60–70. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4371(01)00282-5
|
| [17] | Broemling LD, Tsurumi H (1987) Econometrics and Structural Change, Marcel Dekker, New York. |
| [18] | Capuano C (2008) The option-iPoD. The probability of default implied by option prices based on entropy. IMF. |
| [19] |
Chen J, Gupta AK (1997) Testing and locating variance change-points with application to stock prices. J Am Stat Assoc 92: 739–747. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1997.10474026
|
| [20] |
Chordia T, Swaminathan B (2000) Trading volume and cross-autocorrelations in stock returns. J Financ 55: 913–935. doi: 10.1111/0022-1082.00231
|
| [21] |
Cizeau P, Potters M, Bouchaud JP (2001) Correlation structure of extreme stock returns. Quant Financ 1: 217–222. doi: 10.1080/713665669
|
| [22] |
Conlon T, Ruskin HJ, Crane M (2009) Cross-correlations dynamics in financial time series. Physica A 388: 705–714. doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2008.10.047
|
| [23] |
Constantine AG (1963) Some non-central distribution problems in multivariate analysis. Ann Math Stat 34: 1270–1285. doi: 10.1214/aoms/1177703863
|
| [24] |
Daniel K, Moskowitz T (2016) Momentum crashes. J Financ Econ 122: 221–247. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2015.12.002
|
| [25] |
Davis RA, Pfa_el O, Stelzer R (2014) Limit theory for the largest eigenvalue of sample covariance matrices with heavy-tails. Stoch Proc Appl 124: 18–50. doi: 10.1016/j.spa.2013.07.005
|
| [26] | De Brandt O, Hartmann P (2000) Systemic risk: A survey. European Central Bank. |
| [27] | Dickey DA, Fuller WA (1979) Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. J Am Stat Assoc 74: 427–431. |
| [28] |
Dimson E (1979) Risk measurement when shares are subject to infrequent trading. J Financ Econ 7: 197–226. doi: 10.1016/0304-405X(79)90013-8
|
| [29] | Doris D (2014) Modeling Systemic Risk in the Options Market. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Mathematics, New York University, New York, NY. |
| [30] |
Drożdż S, Grumer F, Ruf F, et al. (2000) Dynamics of competition between collectivity and noise in the stock market. Physica A 287: 440–449. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4371(00)00383-6
|
| [31] | Edelman A, Persson PO (2005) Numerical methods for eigenvalue distributions of random matrices. Math . |
| [32] |
Edelman A, Rao NR (2005) Random matrix theory. Acta Numer 14: 233–297. doi: 10.1017/S0962492904000236
|
| [33] | Franses PH, van Dijk D (2000) Non-Linear Time Series Models in Empirical Finance. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. |
| [34] |
Geman S (1980) A limit theorem for the norm of random matrices. Ann Probab 8: 252–261. doi: 10.1214/aop/1176994775
|
| [35] |
Gopikrishnan P, Rosenov B, Plerou V, et al. (2001) Quantifying and interpreting collective behavior in fnancial markets. Physi Rev E 64: 035106. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.64.035106
|
| [36] |
Granger CWJ (1969) Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica 37: 424–438. doi: 10.2307/1912791
|
| [37] | International Monetary Fund (2009). Global Financial Stability Report; Responding to the Financial Crisis and Measuring Systemic Risks. Washington, D.C. |
| [38] | James AT (1960) The distribution of the latent roots of the covariance matrix. Ann Math Stati 32: 874–882. |
| [39] |
Jin B, Wang C, Miao B, et al. (2009) Limiting spectral distribution of large-dimensional sample covariance matrices generated by VARMA. J Multivariate Anal 100: 2112–2125. doi: 10.1016/j.jmva.2009.06.011
|
| [40] |
Jobst AA (2013) Multivariate dependence of implied volatilities from equity options as measure of systemic risk. International Review of Financial Analysis 28: 112–129. doi: 10.1016/j.irfa.2013.01.005
|
| [41] | Johnstone IM (2001) On the distribution of the largest eigenvalue in principal component analysis. Ann Stat 29: 295–327. |
| [42] | Kawahara Y, Yairi T, Machida K (2007) Change-point detection in time-series data based on subspace identification. Proceedings of the 7th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, 559–564. |
| [43] |
Kritzman M, Li Y, Page S, et al. (2011) Principal components as a measure of systemic risk. J Portf Manage 37: 112–126. doi: 10.3905/jpm.2011.37.4.112
|
| [44] |
Kwiatkowski D, Phillips P, Schmidt P, et al. (1992) Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root: How sure are we that economic time series has a unit root? J Econometrics 54: 159–178. doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(92)90104-Y
|
| [45] |
Laloux L, Cizeau P, Bouchaud JP (1999) Noise Dressing of Financial Correlation Matrices. Phys Rev Lett 83: 1467–1469. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.1467
|
| [46] |
Laloux L, Cizeau P, Potters M, et al. (2000) Random matrix theory and financial correlations. Int J Theor Appl Financ 3: 391–397. doi: 10.1142/S0219024900000255
|
| [47] |
Lequeux P, Menon M (2010) An eigenvalue approach to risk regimes in currency markets. J Deriv Hedge Funds 16: 123–135. doi: 10.1057/jdhf.2010.10
|
| [48] | Lewis M (2010) The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine. W. W. Norton & Company Inc., New York, NY. |
| [49] |
Liu H, Aue A, Debashis P (2015) On the Marˇcenko-Pastur law for linear time series. Ann Stat 43: 675–712. doi: 10.1214/14-AOS1294
|
| [50] |
Liu S, Yamada M, Collier N, et al. (2013) Change-point detection in time-series data by relative densityratio estimation. Neural Networks 43: 72–83. doi: 10.1016/j.neunet.2013.01.012
|
| [51] | Longin F, Solnik B (2001) Extreme correlation of international equity markets. J Financ 5: 649–676. |
| [52] | Lorden G (1971) Procedures for reacting to a change in distribution, Ann Math Stat 42: 1897–1908. |
| [53] |
Marčenko VA, Pastur LA (1967) Distribution for some sets of random matrices. Math USSR-Sbornik 1: 457–483. doi: 10.1070/SM1967v001n04ABEH001994
|
| [54] | Mayya KBK, Amritkar RE (2006) Analysis of delay correlation matrices. Quant Financ. |
| [55] | Meng H, Xie WJ, Jiang ZQ, et al. (2014) Systemic risk and spatiotemporal dynamics of the US housing market. Sci Rep-UK 4: 3655. |
| [56] | Meric I, Kim S, Kim JH, et al. (2001) Co-movements of U.S., U.K., and Asian stock markets before and after September 11, 2001. J Money Invest Bank 3: 47–57. |
| [57] |
Moustakides GV (1986) Optimal stopping times for detecting changes in distributions. Ann Stat 14: 1379–1387. doi: 10.1214/aos/1176350164
|
| [58] | Muirhead RJ (1982) Aspects of Multivariate Statistical Theory, Wiley, New York. |
| [59] | Murphy KM, Topel RH (1985) Estimation and inference in two-step econometric models. J Bus Econ Stat 34: 370–379. |
| [60] |
Newey WK,West KD (1987) A Simple, Positive Semi-definite, Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix. Econometrica 55: 703–708. doi: 10.2307/1913610
|
| [61] | NYSE Financial Index (2014) NYSE Euronex. Available from: http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/nykid.shtml. |
| [62] |
Page ES (1954) Continuous inspection schemes. Biometrika 41: 100–115. doi: 10.1093/biomet/41.1-2.100
|
| [63] | Pan RK, Sinha S (2007) Collective behavior of stock price movements in an emerging market. Phys Rev E 76: 1–9. |
| [64] |
Petterson M (1998) Monitoring a freshwater fish population: Statistical surveillance of biodiversity. Environmetrics 9: 139–150. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-095X(199803/04)9:2<139::AID-ENV291>3.0.CO;2-3
|
| [65] |
Petzold M, Sonesson C, Bergman E, et al. (2004) Surveillance in longitudinal models: Detection of intrauterine growth restriction. Biometrics 60: 1025–1033. doi: 10.1111/j.0006-341X.2004.00258.x
|
| [66] |
Phillips P, Perron P (1988) Time series regression with a unit root. Biometrika 75: 335–346. doi: 10.1093/biomet/75.2.335
|
| [67] | Pillai KCS (1976a) Distribution of characteristic roots in multivariate analysis. Part I: Null distributions. Can J Stat 4: 157–184. |
| [68] | Pillai KCS (1976b) Distribution of characteristic roots in multivariate analysis. Part II: Non-null distributions. Can J Stat 5: 1–62. |
| [69] |
Plerou V, Gopikrishnan P, Rosenow B, et al. (2002) Random matrix approach to cross correlations in financial data. Phy Rev E 65: 066126. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.65.066126
|
| [70] | Poor V, Hadjiliadis O (2009) Quickest Detection, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. |
| [71] | Preisendorfer RW (1988) Principal component analysis in meteorology and oceanography. North Holland, Amsterdam. |
| [72] |
Pukthuanthong K, Roll R (2009) Global market integration: An alternative measure and its application. J Financ Econ 94: 214–232. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.12.004
|
| [73] |
Pukthuanthong K, Berger D (2012) Market Fragility and International Market Crashes. J Financ Econ 105: 565–580. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2012.03.009
|
| [74] | Reinhart C, Rogoff K (2011) This Time Is Di_erent: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. |
| [75] | Fitch cuts Greece's issuer default ratings to 'RD'. (2012, March 9). Reuters. Available from: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/09/idUSL2E8E97FN20120309. |
| [76] | Shiryaev AN (1978) Optimal Stopping Rules. Springer-Werlag, New York. |
| [77] | Shiryaev AN (2002) Quickest detection problems in the technical analysis of financial data. Mathematical Finance - Bachelier Congress, 2000 (Paris). Springer, Berlin, 487–521. |
| [78] |
Silverstein JW (1985) The smallest eigenvalue of large dimensional Wishart matrix. Ann Probab 13: 1364–1368. doi: 10.1214/aop/1176992819
|
| [79] |
Silverstein JW (1995) Strong convergence of the empirical distribution of eigenvalues of largedimensional random matrices. J Multivariate Anal 55: 331–339. doi: 10.1006/jmva.1995.1083
|
| [80] | Smith R, Sidel R (2010). Banks keep failing, no end in sight. Wall Street J. Available from: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB20001424052748704760704575516272337762044. |
| [81] |
Solnik B, Boucrelle C, Le Fu Y (1996) International market correlation and volatility. Financ Anal J 52: 17–34. doi: 10.2469/faj.v52.n5.2021
|
| [82] | Sugiyama M, Suzuki T, Nakajima S, et al. (2008) Direct density ratio estimation in high-dimensional spaces, Ann I Stat Math 60: 699–746. |
| [83] |
Tartakovsky AG, Rozovskii BL, Blazek RB, et al. (2006) A novel approach to detection of intrusions in computer networks via adaptive sequential and batch-sequential change-point detection methods. IEEE T Signal Proces 54: 3372–3382. doi: 10.1109/TSP.2006.879308
|
| [84] | Thottan M, Ji C (2003) Anomaly detection in IP networks. IEEE T Signal Proces 15: 2191–2204. |
| [85] | Thurner S, Biely C (2007) The eigenvalue spectrum of lagged correlation matrices. Acta Phys Pol B 38: 4111–4122. |
| [86] |
Tracy CA, Widom H (1996) On orthogonal and symplectic matrix ensembles. Commun Math Phys 177: 727–754. doi: 10.1007/BF02099545
|
| [87] |
Trivedi R, Chandramouli R (2005) Secret key estimation in sequential steganography, IEEE T Signal Proces 53: 746–757. bibitemTulino2004 Tulino AM, Verd S (2004) Random Matrix Theory and Wireless Communications. Found Trend Commun Inf Theory 1: 1–182. doi: 10.1561/0100000001
|
| [88] | Wetherhill GB, Brown DW (1991) Statistical Process Control. Chapman and Hall, London. |
| [89] |
White H (1980) A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica 48: 817–838. doi: 10.2307/1912934
|
| [90] |
Wigner EP (1955) Characteristic vectors of bordered matrices with infinite dimensions. Ann Math 62: 548–564. doi: 10.2307/1970079
|
| [91] | Wishart J (1928) The generalized product moment distribution in samples from a normal multivariate population. Biometrika 20: 32–52. |
| [92] | Yamada M, Kimura A, Naya F, et al. (2013) Change-point detection with feature selection in highdimensional time-series data. Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence 171: 1827–1833. |
| [93] | Yao JF (2012) A note on a Marˇcenko-Pastur type theorem for time series. Stat Probab Letter 82: 20–28. |
| [94] | Zhang M, Kolkiewicz AW,Wirjanto TS, et al. (2015) The impacts of financial crisis on sovereign credit risk analysis in Asia and Europe. Int J Financ Eng 2: 143–152. |
Figures(28) / Tables(15)
David Melkuev, Danqiao Guo, Tony S. Wirjanto. Applications of random-matrix theory and nonparametric change-point analysis to three notable systemic crises[J]. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2018, 2(2): 413-467. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2018.2.413
| Project | Total sample n = 3011 |
Female only n = 1429 |
Male only n = 1582 |
| Age (years) | 13.2 ± 2.1 | 13.1 ± 2.1 | 13.2 ± 2.1 |
| Height (cm)* | 160.8 ± 12.3 | 158.6 ± 10.1 | 162.7 ± 13.8 |
| Body Weight (kg)* | 52.4 ± 14.7 | 50.9 ± 13.5 | 53.8 ± 15.6 |
| BMI Percentile* | 53.7 ± 29.8 | 52.0 ± 30.3 | 55.1 ± 29.2 |
| Normal Weight (%) | 73.2 | 72.6 | 73.8 |
| Overweight/Obese (%) | 17.7 | 17.1 | 18.3 |
| Underweight (%) | 9.1 | 10.3 | 8.0 |
Note: * sig. sex difference, p < 0.01.
DownLoad:
CSV
| Project | Completely Agree | Mostly Agree | Mostly Disagree | Completely Disagree | |
| PE is important to me.* | TOTAL | 43.0 | 35.5 | 17.5 | 4.0 |
| FEMALE | 35.8 | 38.9 | 20.6 | 4.7 | |
| MALE | 49.5 | 32.4 | 14.7 | 3.4 | |
| PE positively affects my health and well-being.* | TOTAL | 43.8 | 40.5 | 13.5 | 6.6 |
| FEMALE | 36.0 | 45.0 | 16.6 | 2.4 | |
| MALE | 50.8 | 36.3 | 10.6 | 2.2 | |
| PE motivates me to engage in exercise/PA during leisure time.* | TOTAL | 30.9 | 37.5 | 25.0 | 6.6 |
| FEMALE | 20.2 | 40.9 | 33.1 | 5.9 | |
| MALE | 40.6 | 34.5 | 17.7 | 7.3 | |
| I would like to have PE daily.* | TOTAL | 41.6 | 28.3 | 21.4 | 8.7 |
| FEMALE | 30.6 | 33.3 | 26.2 | 9.9 | |
| MALE | 51.5 | 23.8 | 17.1 | 7.6 | |
| I have a good relationship with my PE teacher.* | TOTAL | 54.9 | 36.1 | 7.6 | 1.4 |
| FEMALE | 47.8 | 40.4 | 10.0 | 1.7 | |
| MALE | 61.4 | 32.1 | 5.4 | 1.1 | |
| I consider myself to be good in sports.* | TOTAL | 30.9 | 37.7 | 25.6 | 5.8 |
| FEMALE | 22.0 | 36.8 | 33.3 | 7.8 | |
| MALE | 38.8 | 38.5 | 18.6 | 4.0 | |
| More Important | Equally Important | Less mportant | |||
| Importance of PE compared to other subjects.* | TOTAL | 41.9 | 41.7 | 16.3 | |
| FEMALE | 35.4 | 44.6 | 19.9 | ||
| MALE | 47.9 | 39.1 | 13.1 | ||
Note: * sig. sex difference, p < 0.01.
DownLoad:
CSV
| Project | Completely Agree | Mostly Agree | Mostly Disagree | Completely Disagree | |||||
| Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | ||
| PE is important to me. | 10–11 yrs | 64.3 | 70.5 | 27.3 | 24.8 | 7.6 | 4.2 | 0.8 | 0.5 |
| 12–13 yrs | 38.7 | 56.6 | 51.2 | 34.0 | 9.5 | 7.3 | 0.7 | 2.1 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 17.8 | 37.8 | 43.7 | 36.5 | 32.9 | 20.6 | 5.5 | 5.1 | |
| >15 yrs | 9.1 | 25.7 | 28.7 | 34.5 | 45.3 | 32.6 | 16.9 | 7.2 | |
| PE positively affects my health and well-being.1,2,a | 10–11 yrs | 53.2 | 66.6 | 34.9 | 27.0 | 9.6 | 4.7 | 2.3 | 1.7 |
| 12–13 yrs | 45.1 | 62.7 | 43.7 | 29.1 | 10.1 | 6.7 | 1.1 | 1.5 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 19.7 | 43.9 | 53.8 | 41.4 | 21.5 | 12.9 | 4.9 | 1.8 | |
| >15 yrs | 13.8 | 20.5 | 51.6 | 53.4 | 32.7 | 21.5 | 2.0 | 4.6 | |
| PE motivates me to engage in exercise/PA during leisure time.1,a | 10–11 yrs | 31.6 | 51.5 | 42.0 | 32.7 | 20.8 | 12.9 | 5.6 | 3.0 |
| 12–13 yrs | 24.8 | 45.7 | 43.5 | 37.3 | 27.7 | 13.6 | 4.0 | 3.4 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 11.1 | 34.3 | 41.8 | 36.0 | 40.3 | 19.3 | 6.8 | 10.4 | |
| >15 yrs | 5.5 | 26.4 | 33.1 | 30.3 | 52.8 | 28.3 | 8.7 | 15.0 | |
| I would like to have PE daily. | 10–11 yrs | 54.4 | 71.3 | 32.9 | 21.0 | 7.8 | 4.5 | 4.8 | 3.2 |
| 12–13 yrs | 35.6 | 54.1 | 39.8 | 26.2 | 20.7 | 14.5 | 4.0 | 5.2 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 12.0 | 44.9 | 34.8 | 22.1 | 41.2 | 25.6 | 12.0 | 7.4 | |
| >15 yrs | 8.3 | 30.0 | 20.5 | 26.1 | 45.7 | 26.7 | 25.6 | 17.3 | |
| I have a good relationship with my PE teacher.1,2,c | 10–11 yrs | 62.3 | 66.8 | 26.1 | 25.2 | 8.4 | 7.2 | 3.3 | 0.7 |
| 12–13 yrs | 50.3 | 61.8 | 41.1 | 31.2 | 7.9 | 5.2 | 0.7 | 1.7 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 39.1 | 63.5 | 49.2 | 32.0 | 10.8 | 3.3 | 0.9 | 1.3 | |
| >15 yrs | 31.9 | 50.8 | 50.4 | 42.7 | 15.4 | 5.9 | 2.4 | 0.7 | |
| I consider myself to be good in sports.a | 10–11 yrs | 33.4 | 48.0 | 44.6 | 36.1 | 19.0 | 13.9 | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| 12–13 yrs | 27.5 | 44.0 | 37.6 | 36.9 | 31.2 | 14.9 | 3.7 | 4.2 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 10.8 | 34.5 | 35.7 | 40.9 | 45.2 | 19.4 | 8.3 | 5.1 | |
| >15 yrs | 9.1 | 24.1 | 24.8 | 41.0 | 44.1 | 29.6 | 22.0 | 5.2 | |
| More Important | Equally Important | Less Important | |||||||
| Importance of PE compared to other subjects.1 | 10–11 yrs | 52.2 | 65.6 | 41.3 | 29.7 | 6.6 | 4.7 | ||
| 12–13 yrs | 44.0 | 52.0 | 46.6 | 39.2 | 9.5 | 8.8 | |||
| 14–15 yrs | 20.0 | 43.7 | 48.0 | 39.1 | 32.0 | 17.3 | |||
| >15 yrs | 13.8 | 23.5 | 42.1 | 51.1 | 44.1 | 25.4 | |||
Note: sig. differences across all age groups except for: 1/a no difference between 10–11 years and 12–13 years in girls (1) or boys (a); 2/b no difference between 14–15 years and >15 years in girls (2) or boys (b); c only >15 years sig. different from other age groups in boys.
DownLoad:
CSV
| Project | Completely Agree | Mostly Agree | Mostly Disagree | Completely Disagree | |||||
| Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | ||
| PE is important to me.1,2,a,b | Underweight | 42.9 | 60.3 | 36.7 | 27.0 | 17.7 | 10.3 | 2.7 | 2.4 |
| Normal weight | 37.0 | 52.0 | 38.3 | 30.9 | 19.8 | 13.6 | 4.9 | 3.4 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 26.1 | 34.6 | 42.9 | 40.5 | 26.1 | 21.1 | 4.9 | 3.8 | |
| PE positively affects my health and well-being.2,3,a,b | Underweight | 44.2 | 57.9 | 44.2 | 27.0 | 11.6 | 10.3 | 0.0 | 4.8 |
| Normal weight | 36.7 | 52.1 | 43.4 | 36.2 | 16.9 | 10.0 | 3.0 | 1.7 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 27.8 | 42.6 | 52.2 | 41.2 | 18.4 | 13.1 | 1.6 | 3.1 | |
| PE motivates me to engage in exercise/ PA during leisure time.a | Underweight | 24.5 | 38.9 | 40.8 | 41.3 | 25.9 | 11.1 | 8.8 | 8.7 |
| Normal weight | 20.7 | 42.6 | 40.4 | 35.1 | 33.4 | 15.2 | 5.5 | 7.1 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 15.1 | 33.2 | 42.9 | 28.7 | 36.3 | 30.8 | 5.7 | 7.3 | |
| I would like to have PE daily.1,2,a,b | Underweight | 41.5 | 54.8 | 31.3 | 23.8 | 17.0 | 13.5 | 10.2 | 7.9 |
| Normal weight | 31.4 | 55.5 | 34.1 | 22.7 | 25.2 | 15.6 | 9.3 | 6.2 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 20.4 | 33.9 | 31.0 | 28.4 | 36.3 | 24.6 | 12.2 | 13.1 | |
| I have a good relationship with my PE teacher.1,a,b | Underweight | 50.3 | 61.1 | 40.8 | 31.7 | 7.5 | 6.3 | 1.4 | 0.8 |
| Normal weight | 49.6 | 64.3 | 38.6 | 31.0 | 10.1 | 3.7 | 1.7 | 1.0 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 38.8 | 49.8 | 48.2 | 36.7 | 11.0 | 11.8 | 2.0 | 1.7 | |
| I consider myself to be good in sports.1,2,3,a,b | Underweight | 49.0 | 46.8 | 34.0 | 32.5 | 12.9 | 16.7 | 4.1 | 4.0 |
| Normal weight | 21.6 | 44.1 | 38.7 | 39.8 | 34.1 | 13.4 | 5.6 | 2.7 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 7.8 | 13.8 | 30.6 | 35.6 | 42.0 | 40.8 | 19.6 | 9.7 | |
| More Important | Equally Important | Less Important | |||||||
| Importance of PE compared to other subjects.1,a | Underweight | 34.0 | 48.4 | 49.0 | 37.3 | 17.0 | 14.3 | ||
| Normal weight | 37.5 | 49.3 | 42.8 | 39.2 | 19.7 | 11.5 | |||
| Overweight/Obese | 27.3 | 41.5 | 49.8 | 39.4 | 22.9 | 19.0 | |||
Note: 1 sig. difference between normal weight and overweight/obese girls; 2 sig. difference between underweight and overweight/obese girls; 3 sig. difference between underweight and normal weight girls; a sig. difference between normal weight and overweight/obese boys; b sig. difference between underweight and overweight/obese boys.
DownLoad:
CSV
| Project | Total sample n = 3011 |
Female only n = 1429 |
Male only n = 1582 |
| Age (years) | 13.2 ± 2.1 | 13.1 ± 2.1 | 13.2 ± 2.1 |
| Height (cm)* | 160.8 ± 12.3 | 158.6 ± 10.1 | 162.7 ± 13.8 |
| Body Weight (kg)* | 52.4 ± 14.7 | 50.9 ± 13.5 | 53.8 ± 15.6 |
| BMI Percentile* | 53.7 ± 29.8 | 52.0 ± 30.3 | 55.1 ± 29.2 |
| Normal Weight (%) | 73.2 | 72.6 | 73.8 |
| Overweight/Obese (%) | 17.7 | 17.1 | 18.3 |
| Underweight (%) | 9.1 | 10.3 | 8.0 |
| Project | Completely Agree | Mostly Agree | Mostly Disagree | Completely Disagree | |
| PE is important to me.* | TOTAL | 43.0 | 35.5 | 17.5 | 4.0 |
| FEMALE | 35.8 | 38.9 | 20.6 | 4.7 | |
| MALE | 49.5 | 32.4 | 14.7 | 3.4 | |
| PE positively affects my health and well-being.* | TOTAL | 43.8 | 40.5 | 13.5 | 6.6 |
| FEMALE | 36.0 | 45.0 | 16.6 | 2.4 | |
| MALE | 50.8 | 36.3 | 10.6 | 2.2 | |
| PE motivates me to engage in exercise/PA during leisure time.* | TOTAL | 30.9 | 37.5 | 25.0 | 6.6 |
| FEMALE | 20.2 | 40.9 | 33.1 | 5.9 | |
| MALE | 40.6 | 34.5 | 17.7 | 7.3 | |
| I would like to have PE daily.* | TOTAL | 41.6 | 28.3 | 21.4 | 8.7 |
| FEMALE | 30.6 | 33.3 | 26.2 | 9.9 | |
| MALE | 51.5 | 23.8 | 17.1 | 7.6 | |
| I have a good relationship with my PE teacher.* | TOTAL | 54.9 | 36.1 | 7.6 | 1.4 |
| FEMALE | 47.8 | 40.4 | 10.0 | 1.7 | |
| MALE | 61.4 | 32.1 | 5.4 | 1.1 | |
| I consider myself to be good in sports.* | TOTAL | 30.9 | 37.7 | 25.6 | 5.8 |
| FEMALE | 22.0 | 36.8 | 33.3 | 7.8 | |
| MALE | 38.8 | 38.5 | 18.6 | 4.0 | |
| More Important | Equally Important | Less mportant | |||
| Importance of PE compared to other subjects.* | TOTAL | 41.9 | 41.7 | 16.3 | |
| FEMALE | 35.4 | 44.6 | 19.9 | ||
| MALE | 47.9 | 39.1 | 13.1 | ||
| Project | Completely Agree | Mostly Agree | Mostly Disagree | Completely Disagree | |||||
| Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | ||
| PE is important to me. | 10–11 yrs | 64.3 | 70.5 | 27.3 | 24.8 | 7.6 | 4.2 | 0.8 | 0.5 |
| 12–13 yrs | 38.7 | 56.6 | 51.2 | 34.0 | 9.5 | 7.3 | 0.7 | 2.1 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 17.8 | 37.8 | 43.7 | 36.5 | 32.9 | 20.6 | 5.5 | 5.1 | |
| >15 yrs | 9.1 | 25.7 | 28.7 | 34.5 | 45.3 | 32.6 | 16.9 | 7.2 | |
| PE positively affects my health and well-being.1,2,a | 10–11 yrs | 53.2 | 66.6 | 34.9 | 27.0 | 9.6 | 4.7 | 2.3 | 1.7 |
| 12–13 yrs | 45.1 | 62.7 | 43.7 | 29.1 | 10.1 | 6.7 | 1.1 | 1.5 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 19.7 | 43.9 | 53.8 | 41.4 | 21.5 | 12.9 | 4.9 | 1.8 | |
| >15 yrs | 13.8 | 20.5 | 51.6 | 53.4 | 32.7 | 21.5 | 2.0 | 4.6 | |
| PE motivates me to engage in exercise/PA during leisure time.1,a | 10–11 yrs | 31.6 | 51.5 | 42.0 | 32.7 | 20.8 | 12.9 | 5.6 | 3.0 |
| 12–13 yrs | 24.8 | 45.7 | 43.5 | 37.3 | 27.7 | 13.6 | 4.0 | 3.4 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 11.1 | 34.3 | 41.8 | 36.0 | 40.3 | 19.3 | 6.8 | 10.4 | |
| >15 yrs | 5.5 | 26.4 | 33.1 | 30.3 | 52.8 | 28.3 | 8.7 | 15.0 | |
| I would like to have PE daily. | 10–11 yrs | 54.4 | 71.3 | 32.9 | 21.0 | 7.8 | 4.5 | 4.8 | 3.2 |
| 12–13 yrs | 35.6 | 54.1 | 39.8 | 26.2 | 20.7 | 14.5 | 4.0 | 5.2 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 12.0 | 44.9 | 34.8 | 22.1 | 41.2 | 25.6 | 12.0 | 7.4 | |
| >15 yrs | 8.3 | 30.0 | 20.5 | 26.1 | 45.7 | 26.7 | 25.6 | 17.3 | |
| I have a good relationship with my PE teacher.1,2,c | 10–11 yrs | 62.3 | 66.8 | 26.1 | 25.2 | 8.4 | 7.2 | 3.3 | 0.7 |
| 12–13 yrs | 50.3 | 61.8 | 41.1 | 31.2 | 7.9 | 5.2 | 0.7 | 1.7 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 39.1 | 63.5 | 49.2 | 32.0 | 10.8 | 3.3 | 0.9 | 1.3 | |
| >15 yrs | 31.9 | 50.8 | 50.4 | 42.7 | 15.4 | 5.9 | 2.4 | 0.7 | |
| I consider myself to be good in sports.a | 10–11 yrs | 33.4 | 48.0 | 44.6 | 36.1 | 19.0 | 13.9 | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| 12–13 yrs | 27.5 | 44.0 | 37.6 | 36.9 | 31.2 | 14.9 | 3.7 | 4.2 | |
| 14–15 yrs | 10.8 | 34.5 | 35.7 | 40.9 | 45.2 | 19.4 | 8.3 | 5.1 | |
| >15 yrs | 9.1 | 24.1 | 24.8 | 41.0 | 44.1 | 29.6 | 22.0 | 5.2 | |
| More Important | Equally Important | Less Important | |||||||
| Importance of PE compared to other subjects.1 | 10–11 yrs | 52.2 | 65.6 | 41.3 | 29.7 | 6.6 | 4.7 | ||
| 12–13 yrs | 44.0 | 52.0 | 46.6 | 39.2 | 9.5 | 8.8 | |||
| 14–15 yrs | 20.0 | 43.7 | 48.0 | 39.1 | 32.0 | 17.3 | |||
| >15 yrs | 13.8 | 23.5 | 42.1 | 51.1 | 44.1 | 25.4 | |||
| Project | Completely Agree | Mostly Agree | Mostly Disagree | Completely Disagree | |||||
| Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | ||
| PE is important to me.1,2,a,b | Underweight | 42.9 | 60.3 | 36.7 | 27.0 | 17.7 | 10.3 | 2.7 | 2.4 |
| Normal weight | 37.0 | 52.0 | 38.3 | 30.9 | 19.8 | 13.6 | 4.9 | 3.4 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 26.1 | 34.6 | 42.9 | 40.5 | 26.1 | 21.1 | 4.9 | 3.8 | |
| PE positively affects my health and well-being.2,3,a,b | Underweight | 44.2 | 57.9 | 44.2 | 27.0 | 11.6 | 10.3 | 0.0 | 4.8 |
| Normal weight | 36.7 | 52.1 | 43.4 | 36.2 | 16.9 | 10.0 | 3.0 | 1.7 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 27.8 | 42.6 | 52.2 | 41.2 | 18.4 | 13.1 | 1.6 | 3.1 | |
| PE motivates me to engage in exercise/ PA during leisure time.a | Underweight | 24.5 | 38.9 | 40.8 | 41.3 | 25.9 | 11.1 | 8.8 | 8.7 |
| Normal weight | 20.7 | 42.6 | 40.4 | 35.1 | 33.4 | 15.2 | 5.5 | 7.1 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 15.1 | 33.2 | 42.9 | 28.7 | 36.3 | 30.8 | 5.7 | 7.3 | |
| I would like to have PE daily.1,2,a,b | Underweight | 41.5 | 54.8 | 31.3 | 23.8 | 17.0 | 13.5 | 10.2 | 7.9 |
| Normal weight | 31.4 | 55.5 | 34.1 | 22.7 | 25.2 | 15.6 | 9.3 | 6.2 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 20.4 | 33.9 | 31.0 | 28.4 | 36.3 | 24.6 | 12.2 | 13.1 | |
| I have a good relationship with my PE teacher.1,a,b | Underweight | 50.3 | 61.1 | 40.8 | 31.7 | 7.5 | 6.3 | 1.4 | 0.8 |
| Normal weight | 49.6 | 64.3 | 38.6 | 31.0 | 10.1 | 3.7 | 1.7 | 1.0 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 38.8 | 49.8 | 48.2 | 36.7 | 11.0 | 11.8 | 2.0 | 1.7 | |
| I consider myself to be good in sports.1,2,3,a,b | Underweight | 49.0 | 46.8 | 34.0 | 32.5 | 12.9 | 16.7 | 4.1 | 4.0 |
| Normal weight | 21.6 | 44.1 | 38.7 | 39.8 | 34.1 | 13.4 | 5.6 | 2.7 | |
| Overweight/Obese | 7.8 | 13.8 | 30.6 | 35.6 | 42.0 | 40.8 | 19.6 | 9.7 | |
| More Important | Equally Important | Less Important | |||||||
| Importance of PE compared to other subjects.1,a | Underweight | 34.0 | 48.4 | 49.0 | 37.3 | 17.0 | 14.3 | ||
| Normal weight | 37.5 | 49.3 | 42.8 | 39.2 | 19.7 | 11.5 | |||
| Overweight/Obese | 27.3 | 41.5 | 49.8 | 39.4 | 22.9 | 19.0 | |||
