Methodology
The Healthy Sport Index aggregated and developed data to identify the relative benefits and risks of participating in the 10 most popular high school boys and girls sports. The analysis was assisted by an advisory group of medical and other specialists from the highest level of a variety of sports.
Overall Score
Sports Were Evaluated Based on Three Types of Health Impacts:
The scores within these categories were calculated equally (one-third each) in the Healthy Sport Index default mode, as represented in the dial on the home page. Because parents, educators, municipal leaders and others value health in sports differently, the Healthy Sport Index allows users to customize the ratings. Users may use a sliding scale to reflect how much they emphasize Physical Activity, Safety and Psychosocial Benefits. Each sport’s ranking may recalculate based on the emphasis placed by a user.
Each category (Physical Activity, Safety and Psychosocial Benefits) was scored based on measurements from new or existing data (75% of the score) and expert analysis (25% of the score). This allows data to largely drive the index while acknowledging some limitations with the data and the value of expert analysis.
The data in each measurement were standardized, allowing the scales to be comparable across domains, and weighted based on values adopted by the Healthy Sport Index advisory group. The standardized scores from each category were added (with equal weighting) to produce a final default score for each sport, which can be adjusted by individual users. The 10 boys and 10 girls sports evaluated were selected because they were the most popular high school sports in 2015-16, according to the National Federation of State High School Associations. Golf was among the 10 most popular girls sports that year, but was left off our evaluation because the National High School Sports-Related Injury Surveillance Study does not track golf injury data. In order to compare all sports the same way, girls lacrosse (the 11th-most popular female sport) replaced girls golf.
1/3
of Score
Category 1: Physical Activity
The Healthy Sport Index recognizes that one of the chief contributions of sport participation is physical activity, given the physiological and cognitive benefits that flow to youth whose bodies are in motion. The Healthy Sport Index evaluated this category based on physical activity levels by sport from North Carolina State University original research (75% of the score) and expert analysis (25% of the score).
In partnership with the Aspen Institute, North Carolina State conducted research at high school practices across North Carolina in 2017-18, documenting physical activity through systematic observation. Each sport was measured by the proportion of participants who exhibit these levels of activity at practices:
- Vigorous exercise
- Walking (moderate activity)
- Lying down/sitting/standing (sedentary activity)
Observed physical activity data were converted to standard metabolic equivalents (METs) for each sport to compare sports based on the estimated energy expended during practices. METs can be calculated by multiplying each observed athletes’ physical activity level with an assigned energy expenditure value: 1.5 for every sedentary athlete, 3.0 for every moderate athlete, and 6.0 for every vigorous athlete. These values have been accepted and widely used in estimating the amount and level of physical activity based on observational data.
Each of the 20 sports was observed in their respective fall, winter and spring high school sport season at a representative sample of 12 high schools in North Carolina. Observations were conducted at 605 varsity sports practices, for a total of nearly 700 hours, amounting to 2,420 total athletes observed. A total of 125,286 individual observations were recorded. Schools were selected using a random sample to ensure representation in the state based on district level per pupil expenditure, percent of student body eligible for free/reduced lunch, percent of student body that is of racial minority, geography (to prevent regional clustering), and availability and proximity to hired data collectors.
Practices were observed in lieu of games/competitions as athletes are anticipated to spend more time participating in team practices than in actual games. Practices are also more inclusive than games, involving every athlete regardless of talent level. Therefore, the practice environment was chosen as a more valid and accurate setting for understanding the physical activity outcomes realized by athletes participating in their particular sport.
The state of North Carolina was selected for the research due to North Carolina State University’s work as a national leader in observing physical activity. Also, North Carolina provided geographical balance (halfway between the north and south), ranked in the middle of many quality-of-life and health statistics by U.S. News & World Report, and has a wide diversity of sports that are offered in high schools.
1/3
of Score
Category 2: Safety
The Healthy Sport Index recognizes that the benefits of playing sports can be limited by short- and long-term injuries. The tool evaluated this category based on injury data by sport from existing research (75% of the score) and expert analysis (25% of the score). Each sport was measured and weighted by the following data:
30%
Overall Injury Rate1
15%
Time Loss Due to Injury2
15%
Concussion Rate3
10%
Injuries Requiring Surgery4
5%
Non-Fatal Catastrophic Injuries/Illnesses5
Overall Injury Rate was weighted the highest given how frequently it’s cited publicly and since it provides the best snapshot of injuries. Non-Fatal Catastrophic Injuries/Illnesses were weighted the lowest because of how infrequently they occur. Yet they still happen enough periodically to be included, and parents, news media and other stakeholders have recognized this information as relevant in assessing the risk of playing sports.
The existing data largely came from the National High School Sports-Related Injury Surveillance Study, also known as High School RIO. Each year, the Colorado School of Public Health produces a report by sport that shows a snapshot of the types of injuries, and their frequency, that occur in high school sports.
High School RIO produces a nationally disperse convenience sample of high schools. For the Healthy Sport Index sports evaluated using the data, the number of sampled schools ranged from 145 (football) to 57 (girls lacrosse). The injuries are reported by athletic trainers at select schools across the country, meaning lower-resourced schools without athletic trainers are not being counted. High School RIO results have been used by the National Federation of State High School Associations and are widely applied in studies, including research published by Nationwide Children’s Hospital, American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Athletic Trainers’ Association, and the University of Colorado School of Medicine.
1 Injury rate per 10,000 exposures, National High School Sports-Related Injury Surveillance Study, 2016-17.
2 Percentage of all injuries resulting in greater than three weeks of time loss from the sport, National High School Sports-Related Injury Surveillance Study, 2016-17.
3 Concussion rate per 10,000 exposures, National High School Sports-Related Injury Surveillance Study, 2016-17.
4 Percentage of all injuries requiring surgery, National High School Sports-Related Injury Surveillance Study, 2016-17.
5 Non-fatal catastrophic injury/illness rate per 100,000 exposures, National Center for Catastrophic Sport Injury Research, 1982-2016.
1/3
of Score
Category 3: Psychosocial
The Healthy Sport Index recognizes that psychological and social aspects of sports play an important role in youth having a healthy and positive sports experience. The tool evaluated this category based on high school-athlete survey data (75% of the score) and expert analysis (25% of the score).
Data came from original national surveys of high school athletes conducted by the Aspen Institute and analyzed by the University of Texas, as well as well as data compiled by the Women’s Sports Foundation for a report titled Teen Sport in America: Why Participation Matters. Each sport was measured and weighted by the following data:
40%
Personal Social Skills, Cognitive Skills, Goal Setting, Initiative, Health, Negative Experiences 6
15%
Psychological Health Report Card 7
10%
Substance Abuse8
10%
Academic Achievement 9
The Aspen Institute/University of Texas survey, which accounted for 40 percent of a sport’s score, utilized a slightly modified version of the short-form Youth Experience Scale for Sport (YES-S). The YES-S is a five-factor instrument designed to measure Positive Youth Development (PYD) through tangible, experience-focused items that ask respondents to assess on a four-point scale how often an experience has occurred while playing sports. Questions were asked related to high school athletes’ personal and social skills, cognitive skills, goal setting, initiative, health, and negative experiences. A number of demographic and sport-specific questions were also asked.
The survey received responses during 2018 from 1,290 high school athletes between ninth and 12th grade across the country. The heaviest participation came from North Carolina and Michigan, where targeted efforts were made to obtain representative sampling from different regions of the country. The North Carolina High School Athletic Association and Michigan High School Athletic Association assisted in distributing the survey. While not perfectly representative of demographic trends and sport participation rates, the representation was a solid sample on a scale rarely seen in sport-specific studies involving youth participants. The Women’s Sports Foundation data for psychological health, substance abuse and academic achievement came from the Monitoring the Future (MTF) study between 2010 and 2015. Responses included only high school seniors.
In partnership with the Aspen Institute, the Women’s Sports Foundation analyzed the data beyond the results originally published so the results by sport are now divided by gender. The MTF is a nationally representative study. Additionally, weights were used in the analysis in order to accurately reflect the population of adolescents in the U.S.
6 Aspen Institute/University of Texas psychosocial benefits survey of high school athletes nationally, 2018.
7 Data from Monitoring the Future Study (2010-15) and analyzed by Women’s Sports Foundation in Teen Sport in America: Why Participation Matters.
8 Data from Monitoring the Future Study (2010-15) and analyzed by Women’s Sports Foundation in Teen Sport in America: Why Participation Matters.
9 Data from Monitoring the Future Study (2010-15) and analyzed by Women’s Sports Foundation in Teen Sport in America: Why Participation Matters.
Advisory Group
The Healthy Sport Index was guided by a collection of leading medical and sports health experts. The group met in person twice for in-depth discussion and regularly advised on what data to use, weights on categories, the model used to create rankings, and companion sports for adolescents based on overall health development. Advisory group members were:
Dr. Matt Bowers
- Assistant Professor of Sport Management, University of Texas
Joe Janosky
- Director of Sport Safety
Hospital for Special Surgery
Dr. Neeru Jayanthi
- Sports Medicine Physician
- Director
Emory Sports Medicine Research and Education Emory Sports Medicine Center - Past Board Member
American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM)
Dr. Michael Kanters
- Professor/Coordinator of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management
North Carolina State University
Dr. James Kinderknecht
- Primary Care Sports Medicine
Hospital for Special Surgery - Team Physician
New York Giants, New York Mets, St. John’s University
Dr. Mininder Kocher
- Orthopedic Surgeon
Boston Children’s Hospital - Professor
Harvard Medical School - Orthopedic Consultant
Northeastern University and Babson College
Dr. Michael (Mick) Koester
- Chair
National Federation of State High School Associations Sports Medicine Advisory Committee
Dr. Michele LaBotz
- Physician
InterMed Sports Medicine, Portland, ME - Member
Council on Sports Medicine and Fitness, American Academy of Pediatrics
Dr. Leslie McClure
- Professor and Chair
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Dornslife School of Public Health at Drexel University - Fellow
American Statistical Association
James (Jim) Whitehead
- CEO/Executive Vice President
American College of Sports Medicine
Dr. Laurie Whitsel
- Director of Policy Research
American Heart Association
Expert Opinion Scores
In order for the Healthy Sport Index to capture health factors not included in the data, the advisory group voted on scores for each sport based on Physical Activity, Safety and Psychosocial Benefits. This recognizes that there are limits to available data in high school sports, and opinions from experts can assist in informing parents about sports health. Advisory group members agreed on considering these common factors when voting:
- Injuries not accounted for in Healthy Sport Index
- Overuse injuries
- Repetitive head contact
- Longterm consequences (e.g. arthritis)
- Emergency room injury data
- Other academic research/literature
- Access and longevity
- Ability to participate in sport and financial costs
- Lifelong participation
- Physical literacy
- Any other additional factors (length of season, character development, sport policies, etc.)
The expert opinion score counted for 25% of a sport’s overall score in each of the three categories. Advisory group members rated each sport on a 10-point scale based on the risk-reward benefit of each sport per category. All advisory group members voted except for Dr. Leslie McClure, who elected not to vote since she calculated the final Healthy Sport Index rankings.
Calculations for Rankings
By Leslie McClure, PhD
Dornsife School of Public Health at Drexel University Drexel University
Professor & Chair, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics
Methodology employed for the Healthy Sport Index is similar to methodology used for the County Health Rankings produced by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute.
Terminology:
To help facilitate description of the methodology, it is necessary to understand some terminology. For this index, domain refers to a broad category, while measure refers to the items within that category. There are three domains included in the Healthy Sports Index: Physical Activity, Safety, and Psychosocial. Within these domains, there are varying numbers of items. The figure below provides a schema of the domains and their items.
| Physical Activity | Safety | Psychosocial |
|---|---|---|
| Final MET Mean (0.75) Expert Opinion (0.25) |
Injury Rates (0.30) Concussion Rates (0.15) Time Lost/Injury (0.15) Injuries Requiring Surgery (0.10) Non-Fatal/Catastrophic Illness (0.5) Expert Opinion (0.25) |
Psychosocial Survey (0.40) Substance Abuse (0.10) Academic Achievement (0.10) Psychosocial Health (0.15) Expert Opinion (0.25) |
Standardizing items:
We standardized each measure within each sport for boys and girls separately to the mean for that measure. Recall that our measures are on a variety of different scales: some are rates (e.g. injury rates), some are survey responses (e.g. psychosocial survey), some come from other metrics. Standardizing the measures transforms them onto the same scale. All Z-scores have a mean (average) of 0, and a standard deviation of 1 within a sport as:
Each standardized measure (Z-score) is now relative to others within that measure (e.g., injury rates). For measures where a high score is bad (e.g. injury rates), the Z-score was multiplied by -1 so that it is “reverse coded;” that is, it is recoded so that a higher Z-score is better, in order for that measure to be interpreted in the same way as the other measures. Then, Z-scores that are less than 0 (negative Z-scores) indicate a sport that is worse than average on that measure, and Z-scores that are greater than 0 (positive Z-scores) indicate a sport that is better than average. For example, if a sport has a Z-score of 1.5, this indicates that the sport is 1.5 standard deviations above the average for all of the sports for that measure.
Weights:
Within each domain, the measures were weighted to reflect the relative importance of each. Weights were decided by expert opinion among the advisory group members. Weights are provided in parentheses next to each measure in Figure 1.
Domain Scores:
For each domain, a weighted average of the measures is computed by multiplying each Z-score by its weight and then adding them together for each sport. The domain score is computed as:
After this calculation, each sport will have a single domain score that is the weighted sum of the measures.
Domain Rankings:
We then ordered the domain scores from worst to best across the sports to compute domain-specific rankings, with 1 being the worst and 10 being the best.
Overall Rankings:
The domain-specific scales were averaged to compute an overall score, which was then ordered from lowest to highest across the sports, to compute overall rankings, with 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest. Overall rankings are calculated as:
Final Standardized Scores
| Boys Sport | Overall | Physical Activity | Safety | Psychosocial |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cross Country | 0.701 | 1.612 | 0.864 | -0.374 |
| Swimming | 0.576 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 0.218 |
| Track and Field | 0.4 | 1.055 | 0.608 | -0.463 |
| Soccer | 0.29 | 0.309 | -0.09 | 0.651 |
| Tennis | 0.145 | -0.429 | 1.018 | -0.155 |
| Basketball | 0.03 | -0.258 | -0.048 | 0.395 |
| Wrestling | -0.28 | 0.007 | -0.833 | -0.014 |
| Baseball | -0.521 | -1.741 | 0.084 | 0.093 |
| Lacrosse | -0.612 | -0.237 | -0.841 | -0.757 |
| Football | -0.728 | -0.817 | -1.772 | 0.406 |
| Girls Sport | Overall | Physical Activity | Safety | Psychosocial |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Swimming | 0.565 | 0.972 | 0.736 | -0.013 |
| Cross Country | 0.503 | 1.27 | 0.756 | -0.517 |
| Tennis | 0.405 | -0.033 | 1.013 | 0.234 |
| Volleyball | 0.104 | 0.245 | 0.047 | 0.02 |
| Soccer | 0.03 | 0.916 | -1.415 | 0.588 |
| Basketball | 0.009 | -0.036 | -0.738 | 0.802 |
| Track and Field | -0.107 | -0.262 | 0.678 | -0.736 |
| Softball | -0.212 | -1.36 | 0.064 | 0.66 |
| Lacrosse | -0.265 | 0.021 | -0.604 | -0.214 |
| Cheerleading | -1.032 | -1.733 | -0.539 | -0.824 |
Complementary Sports
The Healthy Sport Index recognizes the benefits of sport sampling and encouraging youth to engage in at least one other activity during the year. Some youth also may want or need to find alternate sports, due to interest or roster-size limitations. The Aspen Institute assembled health and sport experts to recommend additional sports that youth can play to assist overall health and fitness and their athletic/skill development in their primary sport.
The recommendations for each sport based on overall health and fitness came from the Healthy Sport Index advisory group in consultation with the American College of Sports Medicine.
These organizations or experts made recommendations for companion skill development to assist their sport:
Baseball
USA Baseball
Basketball (Boys and Girls)
Kobe Bryant, NBA legend/Mamba League founder; Brian McCormick, Playmakers Basketball Development League
Competitive Cheerleading
U.S. All Star Federation
Cross Country (Boys and Girls)
New York Road Runners
Football
Oliver Luck, XFL commissioner/ex-NFL quarterback
Lacrosse (Boys and Girls)
US Lacrosse
Soccer (Boys and Girls)
US Youth Soccer
Softball
USA Softball
Swimming and Diving (Boys and Girls)
USA Swimming; USA Diving
Tennis (Boys and Girls)
United States Tennis Association
Track and Field (Boys and Girls)
Jackie Joyner-Kersee, Olympic champion in heptathlon/long jump/USA Track and Field board member
Volleyball (Girls)
USA Volleyball
Wrestling
USA Wrestling
Best Practices
The Healthy Sport Index identified tips in each sport on how to get youth active and safe. Best Practices, which are not part of the Healthy Sport Index formula, were gleaned from research and online material from established coaches, medical professionals, and national sport organizations. Each sport profile page on this website features Best Practices and links to resources that can help implementation in each sport.
Glossary of Healthy Sport Index Terms
Are A or A- Student
This is a survey category from the Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school seniors: “Which of the following best describes your average grade so far in high school?” Breakdown of A or A- student by high school students: 32.7 percent of those who don’t participate in sports, 36.7 percent of those who participate in one sport, 39.4 percent of those who participate in two or more sports.
Binge Drinking
This is a survey category from the Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school seniors: “Think back over the last two weeks. How many times have you had five or more drinks in a row? (A ‘drink’ is a glass of wine, a bottle of beer, a shot glass of liquor, a mixed drink, etc.)” Breakdown of binge drinking by high school students: 16.5 percent of those who don’t participate in sports, 20.9 percent of those who participate in one sport, 24.9 percent of those who participate in two or more sports.
Cheerleading
For the purposes of Healthy Sport Index, cheerleading is defined as competitive cheerleading, meaning team competitions. In the Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score, the Monitoring the Future study asked respondents if they “competed in competitive cheerleading.” The Women’s Sports Foundation noted: “Many sideline cheer squads do have a culminating cheer opportunity, which may have prompted respondents to respond favorably. However, it should be noted that a squad whose main focus is sideline cheer with limited competitive cheer opportunities would be unlikely to qualify as a ‘sport’ for Title IX purposes as defined by the Office of Civil Rights.”
Cigarette Use
This is a survey category from the Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school seniors: “How frequently have you smoked cigarettes during the past 30 days?” Breakdown of cigarette use by high school students: 16.2 percent of those who don’t participate in sports, 15 percent of those who participate in one sport, 13.4 percent of those who participate in two or more sports.
Cognitive Skills
This is a survey category from the Aspen Institute psychosocial survey analyzed by the University of Texas. High school athletes rated these statements on a four-point scale: “1) I have improved skills for finding information; 2) I have improved academic skills (reading, writing, math, etc.); 3) I have improved computer/internet skills; 4) I have improved artistic/creative skills.”
Cut Class
This is a survey category from the Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school seniors: “During the last four weeks, how many whole days of school have you missed because you skipped or cut?” Breakdown of cutting class by high school students: 29.8 percent of those who don’t participate in sports, 29.6 percent of those who participate in one sport, 28.3 percent of those who participate in two or more sports.
Fatalism
This is a survey category from Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school seniors: “Do you agree or disagree with each of the following? 1) Every time I try to get ahead, something or somebody stops me; 2) People like me don’t have much of a chance to be successful in life.” Breakdown of fatalism scores by high school students (lower is better): 2.36 for those who do not participate in a sport, 2.26 for those who participate in one sport, 2.18 for those who participate in two or more sports.
Goal Setting
This is a survey category from the Aspen Institute psychosocial survey analyzed by the University of Texas. High school athletes rated these statements on a four-point scale: “1) I learned to find ways to achieve my goals; 2) I set goals for myself in this activity; 3) I learned to consider possible obstacles; 4) I observed how others solved problems and learned from them.”
Health
This is a survey category from the Aspen Institute psychosocial survey analyzed by the University of Texas. High school athletes rated these statements on a four-point scale: “1) I felt like a happier person by playing this sport; 2) I made more friends by playing this sport; 3) I was more interested in being physically active.”
Initiative
This is a survey category from the Aspen Institute psychosocial survey analyzed by the University of Texas. High school athletes rated these statements on a four-point scale: “1) I learned to push myself; 2) I learned to focus my attention; 3) I put all my energy into this activity; 4) I have improved athletic/physical skills.”
Loneliness
This is a survey category from Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school seniors: “Do you agree or disagree with each of the following? 1) A lot of times I feel lonely; 2) I often feel left out of things; 3) I often wish I had more good friends.” Breakdown of loneliness scores by high school students (lower is better): 2.91 for those who do not participate in a sport, 2.73 for those who participate in one sport, 2.58 for those who participate in two or more sports.
Marijuana use
This is a survey category from the Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school senior athletes: “Over the past 30 days, on how many occasions (if any) have you used marijuana (weed, pot) or hashish (hash, hash oil)?” Breakdown of marijuana use by all high school students: 21.5 percent of those who don’t participate in sports, 21 percent of those who participate in one sport, 22.8 percent of those who participate in two or more sports.
METs
Observed physical activity data in the North Carolina State University research were converted to standard metabolic equivalents (METs) for each sport to compare sports based on the estimated energy expended during practices. METs can be calculated by multiplying each observed athletes’ physical activity level with an assigned energy expenditure value: 1.5 for every sedentary athlete, 3.0 for every moderate athlete, and 6.0 for every vigorous athlete.
Negative Experiences
This is a survey category from the Aspen Institute psychosocial survey analyzed by the University of Texas. High school athletes rated these statements on a four-point scale: “1) I have had an injury in the past year in my primary sport that caused me to miss at least one day of school; 2) Adult leaders in this activity are controlling and manipulative; 3) Adult leaders intimidate me; 4) Adult leaders make personal comments that I find upsetting; 5) Adult leaders encouraged me to do something I believed morally wrong; 6) Youth in this activity got me into drinking alcohol or using drugs; 7) I was treated differently because of my gender, race, ethnicity, disability, or sexual orientation.”
Personal Social Skills
This is a survey category from the Aspen Institute psychosocial survey analyzed by the University of Texas. High school athletes rated these statements on a four-point scale: “1) I became better at sharing responsibility; 2) I learned that working together requires some compromising; 3) I learned to be patient with other group members; 4) I learned how my emotions and attitude affect others in the group.”
Psychosocial
This is one of three categories measured by the Healthy Sport Index and involves both psychological and social aspects. This category evaluates high school athletes by personal/social skills, cognitive skills, goal setting, initiative, health, negative experiences, substance abuse, academic achievement, and psychological health.
Self-Derogation
This is a survey category from Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school seniors: “Do you agree or disagree with each of the following? 1) Sometimes I think that I am no good at all; 2) I feel I do not have much to be proud of; 3) I feel that I can’t do anything right; 4) I feel that my life is not very useful.” Breakdown of self-derogation scores by high school students (lower is better): 2.28 for those who do not participate in a sport, 2.10 for those who participate in one sport, 1.97 for those who participate in two or more sports.
Self-Efficacy
This is a survey category from Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school seniors: “Do you agree or disagree with each of the following? 1) Planning only makes a person unhappy since plans hardly ever work out anyway; 2) When I make plans, I almost certain that I can make them work; 3) Planning ahead makes things turn out better.” Breakdown of self-efficacy scores by high school students (higher is better): 3.65 for those who do not participate in a sport, 3.73 for those who participate in one sport, 3.80 for those who participate in two or more sports.
Self-Esteem
This is a survey category from Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school seniors: “Do you agree or disagree with each of the following? 1) On the whole, I’m satisfied with myself; 2) I take a positive attitude toward myself; 3) I feel I am a person of worth, on an equal plane with others; 4) I am able to do things as well as most other people.” Breakdown of self-esteem scores by high school students (higher is better): 3.92 for those who do not participate in a sport, 4.08 for those who participate in one sport, 4.21 for those who participate in two or more sports.
Social Support
This is a survey category from Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school seniors: “Do you agree or disagree with each of the following? 1) There is always someone I can turn to if I need help; 2) There is usually someone I can talk to if I need to; 3) I usually have a few friends around that I can get together with.” Breakdown of social support scores by high school students (higher is better): 4.02 for those who do not participate in a sport, 4.13 for those who participate in one sport, 4.21 for those who participate in two or more sports.
System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time
SOFIT was used by North Carolina State University to measure physical activity during high school sport practices. SOFIT is based on momentary time-sampling techniques in which simultaneous objective information on athlete physical activity levels and the practice context in which they occur is captured.
Will Graduate From College
This is a survey category from the Women’s Sports Foundation data as part of the Psychosocial score. This question was asked of high school seniors: “How likely is it that you will graduate from college (four-year program)?” Breakdown of expecting to graduate from college by high school students: 52.3 percent of those who don’t participate in sports, 64 percent of those who participate in one sport, 65.4 percent of those who participate in two or more sports.
YES-S
The Aspen Institute psychosocial survey was analyzed by the University of Texas using the Youth Experience Scale for Sport. That is a five-factor instrument designed to measure Positive Youth Development (PYD) through tangible, experienced-focused items that ask respondents to assess on a four-point scale how often an experience has occurred while playing sports.
Explore the Ratings
Sports can transform lives. But playing different sports offers different benefits and risks. The best data were aggregated, and top experts consulted, to produce the first-ever tool that assesses the relative benefits and risks of participating in the most popular sports for adolescents.