Fraser-Thomas Youth sport programs

discussion 

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cpes20

Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy

ISSN: 1740-8989 (Print) 1742-5786 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cpes20

Youth sport programs: an avenue to foster positive
youth development

Jessica L. Fraser-Thomas , Jean Côté & Janice Deakin

To cite this article: Jessica L. Fraser-Thomas , Jean Côté & Janice Deakin (2005) Youth sport
programs: an avenue to foster positive youth development, Physical Education & Sport
Pedagogy, 10:1, 19-40, DOI: 10.1080/1740898042000334890

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/1740898042000334890

Published online: 23 Jan 2007.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 31984

View related articles

Citing articles: 148 View citing articles

Youth sport programs: an avenue to
foster positive youth development

Jessica L. Fraser-Thomas,! Jean Côté and Janice Deakin
Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada

Concern about the growth in adolescent problem behaviours (e.g. delinquency, drug use) has led to
increased interest in positive youth development, and a surge in funding for ‘after school programs.’
We evaluate the potential of youth sport programs to foster positive development, while decreasing
the risk of problem behaviours. Literature on the positive and negative outcomes of youth sport is
presented. We propose that youth sport programs actively work to assure positive outcomes through
developmentally appropriate designs and supportive child – adult (parent/coach) relationships. We
also highlight the importance of sport programs built on developmental assets (Benson, 1997)
and appropriate setting features (National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2002) in
bringing about the five ‘C’s of positive development (competence, confidence, character,
connections, and compassion/caring: Lerner et al., 2000). An applied sport-programming model,
which highlights the important roles of policy-makers, sport organizations, coaches and parents
in fostering positive youth development is presented as a starting point for further applied and
theoretical research.

Keywords: Program design; Developmental assets; Sport participation; Sport dropout;
Coaches; Parents; Sport outcomes

There is growing concern about the future of today’s youth. Concerns stem from an
increase in adolescent problem behaviours (delinquency, drug use), coupled with
changing social forces (both parents working, single parent homes, increases in
youth unsupervized time at home alone). Over the past two decades, researchers
and practitioners have taken a ‘deficit reduction’ approach to youth behaviour pro-
blems (Benson, 1997). Most often, a problem has been identified (e.g. obesity),
and funding has been provided so that researchers could examine strategies and
develop interventions to reduce or eliminate the problem. Unfortunately, this
approach is costly, and intervention programs have only demonstrated moderate
success (Benson, 1997). Further, Pittman (1991) has pointed out that problem-free

Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy
Vol. 10, No. 1, February 2005, pp. 19 – 40

!Corresponding author: School of Physical and Health Education, Queen’s University, Kingston,
ON, K7L 3N6, Canada. Email: jesslfraser@hotmail.com

ISSN 1740-8989 (print); ISSN 1742-5786 (online)=05=10019 – 22
# 2005 The Physical Education Association of the United Kingdom
DOI: 10.1080=1740898042000334890

youth are not necessarily fully prepared: youth free of drugs, alcohol use and crime are
not necessarily prepared to productively engage in society. Recent theoretical and
applied research proposes that an ‘asset building paradigm’ hold equal weight to
a ‘deficit reduction paradigm’; that focus be placed on promoting positive youth
development as well as reducing problem behaviours in youth (Benson, 1997).
Accompanying this paradigm shift is a vision of fully able children, eager to
explore, gain competence, and make a difference in society (Damon, 2004). It has
been suggested that youths’ potential needs only to be fostered appropriately for
optimal development to occur (Peterson, 2004).

However, this vision may initially appear idealistic. One does not need to look
far to see the inequities in today’s society. Socio-economic status, race, gender,
and environmental factors can all limit youths’ opportunities. For example, youth
sport programs are becoming increasingly expensive, competitive and elitist. As
De Knop et al. (1996) suggest, cultures around the world are experiencing the insti-
tutionalization of youth sports, which is leading programs to become increasingly
inaccessible to many families. While Hellison and Cutforth (1997) emphasize the
vital role youth programming can play in facilitating the healthy development of
youth at risk, they suggest that organizations serving inner-city children and youth
are overburdened and underfunded.

In this paper, we examine the youth sport and positive youth development bodies
of literature, and propose an applied sport-programming model of positive youth
development. The model emphasizes the vital role of policy-makers in assuring the
accessibility of youth sport programs to all youths, regardless of socio-economic
status, race, culture, ethnicity, or gender. The model also highlights the role of
sport organizations in designing programs that develop better people, rather than
simply skilled individuals. Finally, the model proposes the critical role of coaches in
implementing programs on a day-to-day basis, and of parents in supporting their
child throughout their involvement in sport programs. At both the sport programming
and implementation levels the model highlights pedagogical issues in the areas of
general subject matter, specific learning settings, and instructional methods.

Positive youth development

Numerous definitions of optimal youth development have emerged among research-
ers. Hamilton et al. (2004) suggest that optimal development in youth ‘enables indi-
viduals to lead a healthy, satisfying, and productive life as youth, and later as adults,
because they gain the competence to earn a living, to engage in civic activities, to
nurture others, and to participate in social relations and cultural activities’ (p. 3). It
has been suggested that through optimal development, ‘good youth’ emerge. ‘Good
youth’ are said to experience more positive than negative affect, to be satisfied with
their life as it has been lived, to recognize what they do well and use their strengths
to fulfill pursuits, and to be contributing members of society (Peterson, 2004). The
question of exactly how youths’ potential is fostered through positive development,
and how resulting ‘good youth’ emerge in society is only beginning to be addressed.

20 J. L. Fraser-Thomas et al.

The National Research Council and Institute of Medicine (NRCIM, 2002) has
outlined four main areas of youth development: physical, intellectual, psychologi-
cal/emotional, and social. For each development area, several corresponding assets
are suggested, that facilitate positive youth development. For example, good health
habits and good health risk management skills are assets facilitating positive physical
development. Knowledge of essential life skills, vocational skills, decision-making
skills, and critical reasoning skills contribute to positive intellectual development.
Numerous assets contribute to youths’ psychological and emotional development
including mental health, positive self-regard, coping skills, conflict resolution skills,
mastery motivation, a sense of autonomy, moral character, and confidence. Finally,
assets facilitating youths’ social development include connectedness with parents,
peers, and other adults, a sense of a social place, an ability to navigate in diverse con-
texts, and an attachment to pro-social or conventional institutions. The NRCIM
(2002) outlines eight features of settings that are most likely to foster these positive
developmental assets (Table 1). Hellison and Cutforth’s (1997) eleven key criteria
of ‘state-of-the-art’ extended day programs are strikingly similar; however, they also
highlight the importance of keeping program numbers small, focusing on the whole
person, respecting individuality, empowering youth, encouraging courageous and
persistent leadership, treating youth as resources to be developed, and helping
youth envision their futures.

Benson and colleagues (Benson, 1997; Benson, Leffert, Scales, & Blyth, 1998;
Leffert et al., 1998; Scales & Leffert, 1999; Scales et al., 2000) have also developed
a list of developmental outcomes based on scientific literature and practitioners’
wisdom. The Search Institute’s 40 assets are divided into two broad categories
(external and internal assets), and further divided into eight sub-categories
(Table 2). Despite youths’ differing needs, interests, and environments, Benson and
colleagues have found a trend towards asset depletion in all American youth
(Benson, 1997). Race, ethnicity, and family income do not appear to influence
asset development, while gender and family composition appear to have only a
slight influence on asset development (assets are fewer in boys and in single parent
families). Benson and colleagues’ research has consistently demonstrated three
powerful roles of developmental assets: protection, enhancement, and resiliency.
For example, developmental assets play a protective role because the more assets

Table 1. Features of positive development settings (NRCIM, 2002)

1. Physical and psychological safety
2. Appropriate structure
3. Supportive relationships
4. Opportunities to belong
5. Positive social norms
6. Support for efficacy and mattering
7. Opportunities for skill building
8. Integration of family, school, and community efforts

Positive youth development through sport 21

youth have, the less likely they are to engage in high-risk behaviours such as alcohol,
tobacco, and drug use. Youth high in developmental assets are also less likely to be
depressed or suicidal, and less likely to demonstrate antisocial behaviours, violence,
and school problems. Second, developmental assets play an enhancement role, as
youth who demonstrate more developmental assets are also more likely to ‘thrive’,
meaning they are more likely to be successful in school, show leadership, volunteer

Table 2. 40 Developmental assets (Benson, 1997)

External Assets Support (1 – 6) 1. Family support
2. Positive family communication
3. Other adult relationships
4. Caring neighbourhood
5. Caring school climate
6. Parent involvement in schooling

Empowerment (7 – 10) 7. Community values youth
8. Youth as resources
9. Service to others

10. Safety
Boundaries & Expectations (11 – 16) 11. Family boundaries

12. School boundaries
13. Neighbourhood boundaries
14. Adult role models
15. Positive peer influence
16. High expectations

Constructive Use of Time (17 – 20) 17. Creative activities
18. Youth programs
19. Religious community
20. Time at home

Internal Assets Commitment to Learning (21 – 25) 21. Achievement motivation
22. School engagement
23. Homework
24. Bonding to school
25. Reading for pleasure

Positive Values (26 – 31) 26. Caring
27. Equality and social justice
28. Integrity
29. Honesty
30. Responsibility
31. Restraint

Social Competencies (32 – 36) 32. Planning and decision making
33. Interpersonal competence
34. Cultural competence
35. Resistance skills
36. Peaceful conflict resolution

Positive Identity (37 – 40) 37. Personal power
38. Self-esteem
39. Sense of purpose
40. Positive view of personal future

22 J. L. Fraser-Thomas et al.

to help others, show care and concern for others, and show optimism regarding their
future happiness and success. Third, youth high in developmental assets demonstrate
more resilience in difficult situations.

Another framework of positive youth development is reflected in Lerner et al.’s
(2000) five desired outcomes of youth development, or five ‘C’s of positive youth
development: competence, character, connection, confidence, and caring and
compassion. Lerner et al.’s Model of National Youth Policy (2000) suggests that
policies must be developed to allow families and programs to foster and promote
positive development. If this occurs, youth will in turn demonstrate the five ‘C’s
of positive youth development. Collectively, these processes will lead to the sixth
‘C’ of positive youth development: contribution. As physically, socially, psychologi-
cally, emotionally, and intellectually healthy youth develop into adults, they will
choose to contribute or ‘give back’ to civil society, and in doing so, be promoting
the positive development of the next generation of youth.

Positive youth experiences and outcomes through sport

While the benefits of youth sport participation have been of interest to sport
researchers for some time, no research to date has examined the benefits of sport
within the framework of positive youth development. However, youth clearly experi-
ence many positive developmental outcomes through their sport involvement. In this
section, research on the benefits of youth sport participation is reviewed, within the
context of youth development. Specifically, benefits are examined using physical,
social, psychological/emotional, and intellectual development (NRCIM, 2002) as a
framework.

Physical development

With obesity and associated disease on the rise among today’s children and youth
(Tremblay et al., 2002), the importance of physical activity as a means of fostering
positive youth development has gained considerable attention among researchers.
Physical activity is essential for youths’ optimal development, as it facilitates
normal growth and development in children and adolescents (Bar-Or, 1983).
While cardiovascular fitness and weight control are among the most evident health
benefits of physical activity (Health Canada, 2003; Taylor et al., 1985), skill develop-
ment, improved muscular strength, muscular endurance, flexibility, and bone struc-
ture are additional benefits (Wankel & Berger, 1990; Côté & Hay, 2002). In
addition, adolescents involved in regular physical activity are less likely to smoke
than adolescents not involved in regular physical activity (Aaron et al., 1995).
Finally, given that physical activity habits developed during youth are associated
with physical activity habits in adulthood (Dishman et al., 1985; Baronowski et al.,
1992; Curtis et al., 1999; Robertson-Wilson et al., 2003), active youth are less
likely to develop numerous diseases later in life including heart disease, obesity,

Positive youth development through sport 23

diabetes, osteoporosis, stroke, depression, and cancer (Taylor et al., 1985; Paffenbarger
et al., 1986; Powell et al., 1987; Berger & Owen, 1988; Health Canada, 2003).

Psychological=emotional development

Sport and physical activity offer youth opportunities to experience challenge, fun, and
enjoyment, while increasing their self-esteem and decreasing their stress (Csikszent-
mihalyi, 1975; Long, 1985; Health Canada, 2003). Further, researchers have
argued that activities such as sports, music, and the arts foster positive psychological
and emotional development. For example, Gilman (2001) found that participation in
structured extracurricular activities was associated with higher life satisfaction among
youth, and that the more structured activities youth participated in, the higher their
life satisfaction. Given that subjective well-being or happiness has long been con-
sidered a central component to optimal development and a good life (Park, 2004),
these findings highlight the additional role of sport involvement in youths’ positive
development.

Most recently, the authors (Fraser-Thomas & Côté, 2004) conducted a study with
11 grade five students, randomly selected from a small elementary school in a mid-size
Canadian city. Youth recorded all the activities of their waking day for two days, and
rated their enjoyment for these activities in the form of ‘no fun’, ‘some fun’, or ‘lots of
fun.’ While youth involved in organized sport activities over the two days (N ¼ 5)
rated 45% of their day as being ‘lots of fun’, youth not involved in any organized
sport activities over the two days (N ¼ 6) rated only 8% of their day as being ‘lots
of fun’. Given that all participants spent almost half their day in school, it is clear
that those involved in sports experienced significantly more happiness or subjective
well-being in their day-to-day living.

Social development

Research also indicates that sport experiences foster citizenship, social success,
positive peer relationships, and leadership skills (Evans & Roberts, 1987; James,
1995; Manjone, 1998; Elley & Kirk, 2002; Wright & Côté, 2003). Further, youth
sport and physical activity participation has been positively correlated with adult
career achievement (Larson & Verma, 1999) and negatively correlated with school
dropout and delinquent behaviour (Segrave, 1983; Sheilds & Bredemeier, 1995;
Eccles & Barber, 1999; McMillan & Reed, 1994). Wankel and Berger (1990) high-
light that through sport, youth have opportunities to experience positive inter-
group relations, community integration, social status, and social mobility, while
Côté (2002) suggests that sport provides an arena for the development of social
skills such as cooperation, assertion, responsibility, empathy, and self-control.
Youth involved in sport often demonstrate discipline and commitment (Scanlan
et al., 1993; Shogan, 1999); preliminary evidence suggests that these traits carry
over into other domains of life such as school and community (Marsh, 1993;
Carpenter, 2001).

24 J. L. Fraser-Thomas et al.

While many researchers (e.g. Gilman, 2001) have made the case that youths’ invol-
vement in structured activities such as sports, music, and the arts fosters positive
psychological and emotional development, Larson (2000) proposes that initiative, a
key component to youths’ positive social development, can also be developed
through these structured activities. Given today’s job demands and basic lifestyle
requirements, Larson (2000) argues that youth need to take charge of their lives
through the development of initiative. However, using random sampling moments,
Larson and Richards (1991) found that American youth are bored 27% of the
time. Larson believes that initiative is constructed of three key elements (intrinsic
motivation, concerted engagement, and temporal effort directed towards a goal)
and suggests that structured voluntary activities such as sports, arts, music,
hobbies, and organizations offer the best contexts for initiative development, as
they are voluntary (require youth to be intrinsically motivated), require attention
(elements of challenge), and require effort over time. He distinguishes how structured
leisure activities such as sport (which requires attention and effort over time, and is
voluntary), differs from school (which requires attention and effort over time, but is
not voluntary), and television viewing (which is voluntary, but does not require
attention or effort over time).

Intellectual development

Finally, youths’ involvement in physical activity has been positively correlated with
academic performance in numerous studies (Dwyer et al., 2001; California Depart-
ment of Education, 2002), while participation in high school sport has been positively
linked to school grades, school attendance, choice for demanding courses, time spent
on homework, educational aspirations during and after high school, and college
attendance (Snyder & Spreitzer, 1990; Marsh, 1993; Eccles & Barber, 1999;
Whitley, 1999). Further, it has been suggested that physical activity and sport can
play an important role in fostering cognitive development in youth (Mize, 1991;
Stevens, 1994).

Negative youth experiences and outcomes in sport

While most often youth experience positive outcomes through sport, research
suggests that experiences are sometimes less positive. In this section we discuss nega-
tive outcomes of youth sport.

Physical development

Youth sport involvement has been linked to some negative physical outcomes such as
sport-related injuries and eating disorders (Reel & Gill, 1996; Steiner et al., 2000;
Anshel, 2004). In a study comparing two national rhythmic gymnastics teams,
Beamer and Côté (2003) found that the higher ranked team (2nd vs. 17th in the
world) had done significantly more training, but rated their overall health significantly

Positive youth development through sport 25

lower than the lower ranked team. While many sport injuries are caused by training
volume (Hollander et al., 1995) others are caused by risk-taking (Steiner et al.,
2000), and the nature of the sport. Eating disorders are also a prevalent health
problem in sport settings (Beals & Manore, 1994). Numerous studies have high-
lighted how environmental, psychological, social, and physical factors such as the
aesthetic orientation of the sport, coach pressure, and personality traits (e.g.
perfectionism) can lead to eating disorders in athletes (e.g. Reel & Gill, 1996;
Anshel, 2004). Recent literature suggests that youth athletes, particularly girls, are
becoming concerned about their body image at increasingly early ages (Davison
et al., 2002).

Emotional=psychological development

The negative emotional and psychological outcomes of youth sport have earned con-
siderable attention in youth sport literature in recent years. Wankel and Mummery
(1990) highlighted that youth often feel excessive pressure to win, perceive themselves
as having poor abilities, feel unattached to their teams, and feel vulnerable in the pre-
sence of team mates. Experiences such as these have led youth to experience low self-
confidence and low self-esteem (Wankel & Kreisel, 1985; Martens, 1993). Athletic
burnout is another psychological concern that has gained attention in recent youth
sport literature (Smith, 1986; Coakley, 1992). As a relatively new area of research,
there is some disagreement on the nature of athletic burnout. Smith (1986) defined
burnout as a ‘psychological, emotional, and at times physical withdrawal from a for-
merly pursued and enjoyed activity’ (p. 37), while Coakley (1992) argues that social
organizations of high performance sport, rather than individual stress-based problems
are responsible for athlete burnout.

Social development

The increasing competitiveness in youth sport settings, coupled with the physical
nature of sports, has led youth sport involvement to be linked to numerous negative
social outcomes. In particular, acts of violence and aggression have become common
in youth sport settings (Colburn, 1986). In a recent study of perceived sport aggres-
sion, Gardner and Janelle (2002) found that these behaviours were considered accep-
table and legitimate within the sport environment. Poor sportsmanship has also been
linked to youth sport involvement, while morality reasoning within the sports context
has been found to decrease with age (Bredemeier & Sheilds, 1987; Bredemeier, 1995;
Lemyre et al., 2002).

What factors contribute to positive and negative experiences and outcomes

in youth sport?

Unfortunately, this literature highlights the fact that many sport programs designed to
foster positive youth development are in fact doing just the opposite. This raises the

26 J. L. Fraser-Thomas et al.

question of how policy-makers, sport organizations, coaches, and parents can assure
positive youth development through sport. To answer this question, we first examine
the factors contributing to positive and negative experiences and outcomes in youth
sport. Bronfenbrenner’s (1999) operational model of development provides a frame-
work to facilitate understanding of youths’ activities and the contexts within which
their activities take place. His propositions suggest that for effective development to
occur, a) a person must engage in activities, b) activities must take place ‘on a fairly
regular basis, over an extended period of time,’ c) activities must take place over a
long enough period of time to become ‘increasingly more complex,’ and d) activities
must involve long-term reciprocal relationships (pp. 5 – 6). Thus, the Bioecological
Model emphasizes the importance of the nature and context of youths’ activities
(such as sport) in youths’ development. In examining past literature, two contextual
factors have consistently surfaced as contributing to positive and negative outcomes
and experiences in youth sport: program design (e.g. early diversification versus
specialization) and adult influence (parents and coaches).

Program design

While a limited body of literature has examined youth sport program designs, recent
literature has begun to look at programs’ promotion of early specialization or early
diversification. Specialization has been defined as the ‘limiting of participation to
one sport that is practiced, trained for, and competed in on a year-round basis’
(Hill & Hansen, 1988, p. 76). Recently, early specialization has become popular, as
children are starting their sport participation at earlier ages (Ewing & Seefeldt,
1996), and the availability of sports camps, instructional clinics, and other off-
season programs is increasing (Hill & Simons, 1989). For these same reasons, early
diversification (more diverse early sport experiences) is becoming less common
among youth.

Côté and colleagues’ (Côté, 1999; Gilbert et al., 2002; Baker et al., 2003; Beamer &
Côté, 2003; Soberlak & Côté, 2003; Baker et al., in press) research with elite athletes
in a variety of sports (rowing, tennis, baseball, basketball, netball, triathlons, and
hockey) has led the way in research on early diversification. Expert athletes in Côté
and colleagues’ studies generally passed through three stages of development: the
sampling years (age 6 – 12), the specializing years (age 13 – 15), and the investment
years (age 16þ). Primary factors that distinguished each stage of development were
the number of activities the child participated in, and the structure and design of chil-
dren’s practices and training. These elite athletes generally participated in a variety of
sports during the sampling years (age 6 – 12), a decreasing number of activities during
the specializing years (age 13 – 15), and committed to only one activity during the
investment years (age 16þ), while their practice structure changed from a focus on
deliberate play (Côté & Hay, 2002) during the sampling years to a focus on deliberate
practice (Ericsson et al., 1993) during the investment years.

Orlick (1973, 1974) was among the first to highlight sport program design as a
factor contributing to negative youth sport outcomes and experiences. Orlick

Positive youth development through sport 27

collected questionnaire and interview data on 60 youths (age 7 – 19) formerly involved
in youth sport, and found that 50% of study participants indicated that programs were
too serious, focused only on winning, and lacked enjoyment. More recently, Côté has
focused on the role of early specialization leading to negative outcomes in youth. Côté
(2004) suggests that if specialization occurs at a developmentally inappropriate age,
benefits (e.g. improved skills) are outweighed by physical, psychological, and social
disadvantages (e.g. overtraining, injury, failure to develop transferable skills,
decreased enjoyment, burnout, depression, decreased self-esteem, increased sensi-
tivity to stress, fear of competition, sense of failure, missed social opportunities etc.:
Hill, 1988; Hill & Hansen, 1988; Raglin, 1993; Hollander et al., 1995; Boyd &
Yin, 1996; Seppa, 1996; Beamer & Côté, 2003).

Not surprisingly, early specialization has also been linked to early withdrawal from
sport. Wall & Côté (2004) studied dropout in high-level youth hockey players
(Bantam AAA). They found that dropout athletes participated in a higher quantity
of off-ice training and began off-ice training at a younger age than hockey players
who stayed involved. Barynina and Vaitsekhovskii (1992) also found that Russian
national team swimmers who specialized earlier took more time to reach international
status, did not stay on the national team as long, and retired younger than late
specializers.

This literature confirms that the context (design) of youths’ sport programs can
play a significant role in youths’ sport experiences and outcomes. More specifically,
the literature highlights the benefits of early diversification versus early specialization,
in the promotion of positive youth development through sport.

Adult influences

Bronfenbrenner’s (1999) model also suggests that in order for effective development
to occur, youth must experience long-term reciprocal relationships with others, such
as parents, coaches, and peers. It is therefore not surprising that a second factor con-
sistently associated with youths’ positive and negative outcomes through sport is the
role that adults play in youths’ sport experiences.

Parental influences. Clearly, parent behaviors and parenting styles can have both posi-
tive and negative influence on children’s sport experiences. Numerous studies have
found that children who perceive more positive interactions, support, and encourage-
ment, and less pressure from parents, experience more sport enjoyment, show more
preference for challenge, and display more intrinsic motivation than other children
(Scanlan & Lewthwaite, 1986; Brustad & Weigand, 1989, as cited by Brustad,
1992). In addition, positive parental influence has been associated with greater attrac-
tion to sport and physical activity, and higher levels of sport involvement (Weitzer,
1989; Brustad, 1993, 1996).

Research examining the parent behaviors of outstanding athletes also sheds light on
what can be assumed to be a positive path of development through sport. For
example, Csikszentmihalyi et al. (1993) examined the influence of family structure

28 J. L. Fraser-Thomas et al.

on the development of talented American high school students (N ¼ 58) in a variety
of fields including athletics. Teenagers from families that were stable and supportive,
and promoted challenge and opportunities, were happier, more cheerful, more alert,
and showed more excitement towards their home and work experiences than teens
from other families. In addition, these teenagers felt more often that they were
living up to their own and others’ expectations, and that they were doing something
that had personal and long-term importance. Côté’s (1999) study with elite athletes
also highlights how parents play important roles throughout development. Côté
suggests that parents progress from a leadership role during early childhood to a fol-
lowing and supporting role during later adolescence.

Most research linking parents to negative sport experiences and outcomes
originates in the dropout and burnout literature. Robinson and Carron (1982)
found that football players who dropped out perceived themselves to receive less
father support than other players. Others (Gould et al., 1996a, 1996b; Weirsma,
2000; Baker & Robertson-Wilson, 2003) have linked parents’ criticisms and high
expectations to burnout in youth athletes. Many (Coakley, 1992; Raedeke & Smith;
2001) suggest that youth often feel obligated to continue training and competing in
order to fulfill parent or coach expectations. While this feeling of ‘entrapment’ has
been associated with burnout, specific parent behaviours that lead youth to experi-
ence this feeling are not entirely understood. Finally, it has been suggested that
parents often play a role in children’s paths to early specialization (associated with
less positive sport outcomes and experiences) by funding their involvement in
camps, clinics, and lessons, and by providing sport-specific facilities in the home
(Hill & Hansen, 1988).

Coach influence. Numerous studies have highlighted the role the coach can play in
positively or negatively influencing youths’ sport experience. Smith, Smoll, and
Curtis (1978) were among the first to examine youth coaches’ behaviours. They
found that the best liked coaches were those who demonstrated more technical instruc-
tional, reinforcement, and mistake contingent reinforcement behaviours. In a more
recent intervention study, Smoll et al. (1993) found that coaches who were trained to
increase reinforcement and technical instruction behaviours, and to decrease non-
reinforcement, punishment, and control behaviours were better liked, created an
atmosphere that athletes perceived as more fun, and created more team unity than
untrained coaches. Other studies (Salminen & Liukkonen; 1996; Martin et al., 1999)
have found that youth prefer coaches who demonstrate child-involved democratic
coaching styles.

As Peterson (2004) points out, youth development programs such as sports
have the potential to ‘build a better kid’, but the personal characteristics of group
leaders are critical for the success of all youth development programs. Several
authors (Hill & Hansen, 1988; Siegenthaler & Gonzalez, 1997 Gilbert et al.,
2001a, 2001b) have suggested that coaches who place primary emphasis on
winning often exploit their athletes rather than considering their athletes’ develop-
mental stages and advancing their athletes’ psychological and social best interests.

Positive youth development through sport 29

Dropout and burnout studies have shed light on the role coaches can play in contri-
buting to negative youth sport experiences and outcomes. For example, studies with
dropout swimmers and football players (Robinson & Carron, 1982; Pelletier et al.,
2001) found that dropouts perceived their coaches as less encouraging and suppor-
tive, and more controlling and autocratic than non-dropouts.

In sum, Bronfenbrenner’s (1999) Bioecological Model highlights that effective
development occurs through children’s involvement in activities that are regular
and enduring, and increase in complexity over time. Sport can provide this optimal
setting, but contextual shortcomings such as poor program design and negative
adult influences can hinder rather than enhance positive youth development.

Towards a model of positive youth development through sport

The challenge for policy-makers, sport organizations, coaches, and parents is to
assure that youths’ experiences and outcomes are positive rather than negative.
Youth participation in an activity does not automatically assure the acquisition par-
ticular habits and dispositions, but rather, programs need to be explicitly designed
to teach these habits and critical life skills (NRCIM, 2002), and coaches need to
play an active role in appropriate implementation. In this section we highlight how
the NRCIM’s (2002) features of settings that promote positive youth development,
Benson’s (1997) Developmental Assets, and Côté’s Developmental Model of Sport
Participation (DMSP: Côté, 1999; Côté & Hay, 2002; Côté et al., 2003) can be inte-
grated into an applied sport-programming model that can be used to promote positive
youth development.

Features of settings and developmental assets

The NRCIM (2002) have outlined eight features of settings that are most likely to
foster positive assets in youth, all of which should be considered by policy-makers,
sport organizations, parents, and coaches when designing and implementing youth
sport programs (see Table 1). First, the NRCIM suggest that essential to any
setting aimed at promoting positive youth development is physical and psychological
safety and security. While children’s physical safety is often a concern in sport settings,
children’s psychological and emotional sense of safety and security must not be over-
looked. If programs are implemented inappropriately, sport environments can often
be intimidating or even frightening to youth. Second, settings must provide clear
and consistent (age-appropriate) structure, and appropriate adult supervision. All
too often in youth sport settings, coaches are volunteers with insufficient knowledge
of youths’ developmental capabilities. Supportive adult relationships (with parents
and coaches) and opportunities to belong comprise the third and fourth setting fea-
tures. Again, these relationships and opportunities must be worked towards rather
than assumed to occur. While one would assume youth sport programs would
facilitate positive social norms (the fifth setting feature), much research continues
to indicate that many programs promote masculinity, aggression, and competition

30 J. L. Fraser-Thomas et al.

(Eder & Parker, 1987). Sixth, the NRCIM suggest that settings support youths’
efficacy and sense of mattering. More specifically, youth sport programs must be
child-centred, and promote empowerment, autonomy, and opportunities to experi-
ence challenge. Sport is often recognized for providing skill-building opportunities
(the seventh setting feature), but again, this occurs only through developmentally
appropriate program designs and coaching. Finally, programs that integrate family,
school, and community create optimal environments for positive youth development,
as this integration creates opportunities for meaningful communication between
different settings in youths’ lives.

Programs fostering Benson’s (1997) 40 developmental assets have also been found
to lead to positive youth development. While sport programs cannot be expected to
foster all 40 assets, we believe that programs have the potential to foster several of
them (see Table 2). For example, involvement in sport programs can foster external
assets in the areas of constructive use of time, emotional support from family, empow-
erment, positive intergenerational relationships, positive role models, and high expec-
tations. Past research also indicates that youth sport programs have the potential to
foster numerous internal assets such as achievement motivation, school engagement,
caring, responsibility, social competencies, empathy, cultural competence, resistance
skills, conflict resolution skills, and a sense of positive identity.

Developmental model of sport participation

No model to date has embraced the notion that positive youth development through
sport must be deliberately worked towards by coaches, parents, sport organizations,
and policy makers. Only Côté’s DMSP (Côté, 1999; Côté & Hay, 2002; Côté
et al., 2003) begins to acknowledge the necessity of designing sport programs that
consider youths’ physical, psychological, social, and intellectual development, and
are thus conscientiously designed to foster developmentally appropriate training
patterns and social influences.

The DMSP is built on Côté and colleagues’ (Côté, 1999; Gilbert et al., 2002; Baker
et al., 2003; Beamer & Côté, 2003; Soberlak & Côté, 2003; Baker et al., in press)
research with expert athletes, and integrates many of the concepts suggested by the
NRCIM (2002) and Benson (1997) to be necessary to foster positive youth develop-
ment. For example, the model outlines specific stages of sport participation
(sampling, ages 6 – 12; specializing, ages 13 – 15; investing, ages 16þ) according to
positive physical, psychological, and social development patterns. In suggesting invol-
vement in a diverse number of activities during early childhood, and by suggesting a
shift from deliberate play to deliberate practice from childhood to adolescence, the
model is in line with the NRCIM’s (2002) setting features that suggest the importance
of clear and consistent program structure, opportunities to develop efficacy, and
opportunities to improve skills. From a psychosocial perspective, the model also
makes suggestions for appropriate coach and parent behaviors during young athletes’
development, which are consistent with the NRCIM’s (2002) setting features of
physical and psychological safety and security, appropriate adult supervision, and

Positive youth development through sport 31

supportive adult relationships. Psychosocial dimensions of Côté’s model are also
consistent with numerous of Benson’s (1997) developmental assets in the areas of
support, empowerment, and boundaries and expectations.

Towards an integrated model

In Figure 1 we present an applied sport-programming model of positive youth devel-
opment, which incorporates Côté’s DMSP into the larger framework of positive
youth development. Through the model, we suggest that successful youth sport pro-
grams: a) consider youths’ physical, psychological, social, and intellectual stages of
development (Côté, 1999; Côté & Hay, 2002; Côté et al., 2003), b) are conducted
in appropriate settings (NRCIM, 2002) and c) foster developmental assets in youth
(Benson, 1997). Further, we propose that the successful design and implementation
of these programs depends on the efforts of policy-makers, sport organizations,
coaches, and parents.

First, we suggest that given increasing elitism, institutionalization, and competition
in youth sport, policy-makers must assure the accessibility of youth sport programs to
all youth, regardless of socio-economic status, race, culture, ethnicity, or gender.
Hellison and colleagues’ (Hellison, 1993; Hellison & Cutforth, 1997; Hellison
et al., 2000) work in underserved communities highlights the critical role of after
school programs in promoting the positive development of all youth, particularly
youth exposed to a wide range of negative influences.

Second, once funding is provided, we propose that sport organizations have a
responsibility to design programs that develop better people rather than simply

Figure 1. An applied sport-programming model of positive youth development

32 J. L. Fraser-Thomas et al.

skilled individuals. Programming must be driven by theoretical and applied research
in the areas of youth sport and positive youth development, and give particular
consideration to general subject matter, specific learning settings, and methods of
instruction. Programs should include more extensive coach training opportunities;
through training, education, and experience, coaches can learn to teach and model
the life skills and developmental assets that programs are aiming to foster in youth.

Third, we suggest that coaches and parents play a critical role in determining the
quality of youths’ experiences and subsequent outcomes in sport. Hellison (2003)
provides a framework for teaching personal and social responsibility through physical
activity, which can begin to guide positive youth development coaching. He highlights
the roles of integration, transfer, empowerment, and coach – athlete relationships in
leading youth from irresponsibility, to respect, participation, self-direction, and
caring. He also provides preliminary teaching strategies including counselling time,
awareness talks, group meetings, and reflection time.

In sum, the applied sport-programming model of positive youth development pro-
poses that if policy-makers, sport organizations, coaches, and parents are successful in
developing and implementing youth sport programs that consider youths’ stages of
development, are conducted in appropriate settings, and foster developmental
assets, youth will subsequently have positive sport experiences, and emerge as compe-
tent, confident, connected, compassionate, character-rich members of society. Most
likely, these youth will also follow a path to sport expertise or recreational sport invol-
vement. However, the model suggests that if policy-makers, sport organizations,
coaches, and parents are unsuccessful, or only partially successful in developing
and implementing youth sport programs that consider youths’ stages of development,
are conducted in appropriate settings, and foster developmental assets, youth will
experience less positive experiences in sport, and will emerge as less competent, con-
fident, connected, compassionate, character-rich members of society. In addition,
these youth will likely dropout or burnout of sport.

Future research

In addition to providing a framework to guide youth sport programming, the applied
model serves to highlight areas for future research. First, future research should
explore the different paths to positive youth development through sport. While the
applied model assumes two positive developmental paths (the path to sport expertise
and the path to recreational sport involvement), and one negative developmental path
(the path to sport dropout), most research using the DMSP as a framework has
studied the path to sport expertise (Côté, 1999; Gilbert et al., 2002; Beamer &
Côté, 2003; Baker et al., 2003; Soberlak & Côté, 2003; Baker et al., in press).
While a path through the sampling, specializing, and investment years can lead to
expertise, more understanding of the training and psychosocial factors that lead to
recreational sport participation and complete drop out from sport is required.

Second, future research should examine how sport-specific settings can foster
positive youth development most effectively. In particular, research should examine

Positive youth development through sport 33

which setting features (NRCIM, 2002), which developmental assets (Benson, 1997),
and which developmental paths (Côté, 1999; Côté & Hay, 2002; Côté et al., 2003) are
most consistently associated with successful sport programs that foster the 5 ‘C’s of
positive youth development (Lerner et al., 2000), and how successful sport programs
integrate these specific features and assets.

Third, future research should expand on the role of adults throughout youths’ sport
development. While the model provides some guidelines for coach behaviours
through development, no research to date has examined specific pedagogical issues
(e.g. learning settings, general subject matter, and methods of instruction) within
the framework of positive youth development through sport. Exploratory research
is necessary to understand exactly how coaches can most effectively teach life skills
and foster positive development in youth. Further, the model provides only general
guidelines on parent behaviours, which are based primarily on qualitative retrospec-
tive research (e.g. Bloom, 1985; Côté, 1999). Additional research using quantitative
prospective methodologies could offer additional insight into specific parent beha-
viours that could contribute to positive development through sport.

Finally, this model should be used to guide future research in special populations.
While some research (e.g. Hellison & Cutforth, 1997) has highlighted the critical role
youth sport programs can play in promoting the healthy development of ‘good youth’
in underprivileged communities, more extensive studies framed in the asset building
paradigm must examine the unique challenges and requirements of program develop-
ment and implementation in underserved communities.

Conclusion

Given concern about the growth in adolescent problem behaviours in youth, the
purpose of this paper was to highlight the benefits of organized youth sport, and
the role that organized sports can play in contributing to the positive development
in youth. We presented literature demonstrating how youth involved in organized
sport can benefit from a better quality of life and develop numerous social skills;
however, we also outlined some of the negative outcomes of youth sport. We used
Bronfenbrenner’s (1999) Bioecological Model to highlight how shortcomings in
children’s activity contexts, such as poor sport program designs (early specialization)
and negative adult influences (parents and coaches), can hinder rather than enhance
positive youth development.

Throughout the paper, we emphasized that organized sport programs need to be
consciously designed to assure that youth have positive rather than negative experi-
ences, resulting in positive rather than negative outcomes. We outlined setting fea-
tures (NRCIM, 2002) and developmental assets (Benson, 1997) said to foster
positive youth development, and presented an applied sport-programming model of
positive youth development as a starting point for further theoretical and applied
research. The model highlights the important role of policy-makers, sport organiz-
ations, coaches, and parents in creating sport programs that embrace particular
setting features and developmental assets, so to in turn create competent, confident,

34 J. L. Fraser-Thomas et al.

connected, compassionate, character-rich members of society. Lerner and colleagues’
(2000) Model of National Youth Policy suggests that these processes will in turn lead
to ‘contribution’, the sixth ‘C’ of positive youth development, so that youth will ‘give
back’ to civil society, and promote the positive development of the next generation of
youth.

As researchers continue to gain understanding of the factors contributing to posi-
tive and negative outcomes in youth sport settings, and as more comprehensive
models of positive youth development through sport evolve, we urge that policy-
makers, sport organizations, coaches, and parents stay abreast of current research,
and apply findings to youth sport programs. While organized sport has the potential
to play a significant role in contributing to youths’ positive development, it is necess-
ary to recognize that positive youth development through sport is not automatic, but
to the contrary, is dependent upon a multitude of factors that must be considered
when planning and designing youth sport programs.

Note

1. Support for the writing of this manuscript was given by doctoral and standard research grants
from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC Grants #
752-2003-1319 and # 410-02-0325).

References

Aaron, D. J., Dearwater, S. R., Anderson, R. D., Olsen, T., Kriska, A. M. & Laport, R. E. (1995)
Physical activity and the initiation of high-risk health behaviors in adolescents, Medicine and
Science in Sports and Exercise, 27, 1639 – 1645.

Anshel, M. H. (2004) Sources of disordered eating patterns between ballet dancers and non-
dancers, Journal of Sport Behavior, 27, 115 – 133.

Baker, J., Côté, J. & Abernethy, B. (2003) Learning from the experts: practice activities of expert
decision makers in sport, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74, 342 – 347.

Baker, J., Côté, J. & Deakin, J. (in press) Expertise in ultra-endurance triathletes: early sport
involvement, training structure, and the theory of deliberate practice, Journal of Applied
Sport Psychology.

Baker, J. & Robertson-Wilson, J. (2003) On the risks of early specialization in sport, Physical and
Health Education Journal, 69(1), 4 – 8.

Bar-Or, O. (1983) Pediatric sports medicine for the practitioner: from physiologic principles to clinical appli-
cation (New York, Springer Verlag).

Baranowski, T., Bouchard, C., Bar-Or, O., Bricker, T., Heath, G., Kimm, S. Y. S. et al. (1992)
Assessment, prevalence, and cardiovascular benefits of physical activity and fitness in
youth, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 24, S237 – 247.

Barynina, I. I. & Vaitsekhovskii, S. M. (1992) The aftermath of early sports specialization for highly
qualified swimmers, Fitness and Sport Review International, 27(4), 132 – 133.

Beals, K. A. & Manore, M. M. (1994) The prevalence and consequences of subclinical eating
disorders in female athletes, International Journal of Sport Nutrition, 4, 175 – 195.

Beamer, M. & Côté, J. (2003) What does it take to be an Olympic champion? Reaching high levels of sport
performance at different life stages. Symposium conducted at the 110th annual meeting of the
American Psychological Association (APA), August. Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Benson, P. L. (1997) All kids are our kids: what communities must do to raise caring and responsible
children and adolescents (San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass).

Positive youth development through sport 35

Benson, P. L., Leffert, N., Scales, P. C. & Blyth, D. A. (1998) Beyond the ‘village’ rhetoric: creating
healthy communities for children and adolescents, Applied Developmental Science, 2(3),
138 – 159.

Berger, B. G. & Owen, D. R. (1988) Stress reduction and mood enhancement in four exercise
modes: swimming, body conditioning, hatha yoga, and fencing, Research Quarterly for Exercise
and Sport, 59, 148 – 159.

Bloom, B. (1985) Developing talent in young people (New York, Ballantine).
Boyd, M. P. & Yin, Z. (1996) Cognitive – affective sources of sport enjoyment in adolescent sport

participants, Adolescence, 31, 383 – 395.
Bredemeier, B. J. (1995) Divergence in children’s moral reasoning about issues in daily life and sport

specific contexts, International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, 453 – 463.
Bredemeier, B. J. & Shields, D. L. (1987) Moral growth through physical activity: a structural

developmental approach, in: D. R. Gould & M. R. Weiss (Eds) Advances in pediatric sport
sciences, vol. 2 (Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics), 143 – 165.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1999) Environments in developmental perspective: theoretical and operational
models, in: S. L. Friedman & T. D. Wachs (Eds) Measuring environment across the life span.
Emerging methods and concepts (Washington, American Psychological Association), 3 – 28.

Brustad, R. J. (1992) Integrating socialization influences into the study of children’s motivation in
sport, Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 14, 59 – 77.

Brustad, R. J. (1993) Who will go out and play? Parental and psychological influences on children’s
attraction to physical activity, Pediatric Exercise Science, 5, 210 – 223.

Brustad, R. J. (1996) Attraction to physical activity in urban schoolchildren: parental socialization
and gender influences, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67, 316 – 323.

California Department of Education (2002) State study proves physically fit kids perform better
academically. News Release. Available online at: www.cde.ca.gov/news/releases2002/
re137.asp (accessed 23 November 2003).

Carpenter, P. (2001) The importance of a church youth clubs’ sport provision to continued church
involvement, Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 25, 283 – 300.

Coakley, J. J. (1992) Burnout among adolescent athletes: a personal failure or social problem?
Sociology of Sport Journal, 9, 271 – 285.

Colburn, K. (1986) Deviance and legitimacy in ice hockey: a microstructural theory of deviance,
The Sociological Quarterly, 27, 63 – 74.

Côté, J. (1999) The influence of the family in the development of talent in sport, The Sport Psychol-
ogist, 13, 395 – 417.

Côté, J. (2002) Coach and peer influence on children’s development through sport, in: J. M. Silva
& D. E. Stevens (Eds) Psychological foundations of sport (Boston, MA, Allyn & Bacon),
520 – 540.

Côté, J. (2004, January) Education through sport participation: a developmental perspective. European
Lunch of the European Year of Education through Sport (EYES), Dublin, Ireland.

Côté, J., Baker, J. & Abernethy, B. (2003) From play to practice: a developmental framework for the
acquisition of expertise in team sport, in: J. Starkes & K. A. Ericsson (Eds) Recent advances in
research on sport expertise (Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics), 89 – 114.

Côté, J. & Hay, J. (2002) Children’s involvement in sport: a developmental perspective, in: J. M.
Silva & D. E. Stevens (Eds) Psychological foundations of sport (Boston, MA, Allyn & Bacon),
484 – 502.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975) Beyond boredom and anxiety: the experience of play in work and games
(San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass).

Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K. & Whalen, S. (1993) Talented teenagers: the roots of success and
failure (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).

Curtis, J., McTeer, W. & White, P. (1999) Exploring effects of school sport experiences on sport
participation later in life, Sociology of Sport Journal, 16, 348 – 365.

36 J. L. Fraser-Thomas et al.

Damon, W. (2004) What is positive youth development? Annals of the American Academy of Political
and Social Science, 591, 13 – 24.

Davison, K. K., Earnest, M. B. & Birch, L. L. (2002) Participation in aesthetic sports and girls’
weight concerns at ages 5 and 7, International Journal of Eating Disorders, 31, 312 – 317.

De Knop, P., Engström, L. M. & Skirstad, B. (1996) Worldwide trends in youth sport, in:
P. De Knop, L.-M. Engström, B. Skirstad & M. Weiss (Eds) Worldwide trends in youth sport
(Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics), 276 – 281.

Dishman, R. K., Sallis, J. F. & Orenstein, D. R. (1985) The determinants of physical activity and
exercise, Public Health Reports, 100(2), 158 – 171.

Dwyer, T., Sallis, J. F., Blizzard, L., Lazarus, R. & Dean, K. (2001) Relation of academic perform-
ance to physical activity and fitness in children, Pediatric Exercise Science, 13, 225 – 238.

Eccles, J. S. & Barber, B. L. (1999) Student council, volunteering, basketball, or marching band: what
kind of extracurricular involvement matters? Journal of Adolescent Research, 14(1), 10– 43.

Eder, D. & Parker, S. (1987) The cultural production and reproduction of gender: the effect of
extracurricular activities on peer-group culture, Sociology of Education, 60, 200 – 213.

Elley, D. & Kirk, D. (2002) Developing citizenship through sport: the impact of a sport-based
volunteer programme on young sport leaders, Sport, Education and Society, 7(2), 151 – 166.

Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T. & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993) The role of deliberate practice in the
acquisition of expert performance, Psychological Review, 100, 363 – 406.

Evans, J. & Roberts, G. C. (1987) Physical competence and the development of children’s peer
relations, Quest, 39, 25 – 35.

Ewing, M. E. & Seefeldt, V. (1996) Patterns of participation and attrition in American agency
sponsored youth sports, in: F. L. Smoll & R. E. Smith (Eds) Children and youth in sport: a bio-
psychosocial perspective (Dubuque, IA, Brown & Benchmark), 31 – 45.

Fraser-Thomas, J. L. & Côté, J. (2004) The role of structured sports in children’s daily happiness. Manu-
script in preparation.

Gardner, R. E. & Janelle, C. M. (2002) Legitimacy judgements of perceived aggression and asser-
tion by contact and non-contact sport participants, International Journal of Sport Psychology,
33, 290 – 306.

Gilbert, J. N., Côté, J., Harada, C., Marchbanks, C. & Gilbert, W. D. (2002, October – November)
Comparison of developmental activities of Division 1 and recreational baseball players, paper
presented at the meeting of the Association for the Advancement of Applied Sport Psychology,
Tucson, Arizona.

Gilbert, W. D., Gilbert, J. N. & Trudel, P. (2001a) Coaching strategies for youth sports. Part 1:
Athlete behavior and athlete performance, Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and
Dance, 72(4), 29 – 33.

Gilbert, W. D., Gilbert, J. N. & Trudel, P. (2001b) Coaching strategies for youth sports. Part 2:
Personal characteristics, parental influence, and team organization, Journal of Physical
Education, Recreation and Dance, 72(5), 41 – 46.

Gilman, R. (2001) The relationship between life satisfaction, social interest, and frequency of
extracurricular activities among adolescent students, Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20,
749 – 767.

Gould, D., Udry, E., Tuffey, S. & Loehr, J. (1996a) Burnout in competitive junior tennis players:
I. A quantitative psychological assessment, The Sport Psychologist, 10, 322 – 340.

Gould, D., Tuffey, S., Udry, E. & Loehr, J. (1996b) Burnout in competitive junior tennis players: II.
Qualitative analysis, The Sport Psychologist, 10, 341 – 366.

Hamilton, S. F., Hamilton, M. A. & Pittman, K. (2004) Principles for youth development, in: S. F.
Hamilton & M. A. Hamilton (Eds) The youth development handbook. Coming of age in American
communities (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage), 3 – 22.

Health Canada (2003) Canada’s physical activity guide to healthy active living. Available online at:
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hppb/paguide/pdf/guideEng (accessed 4 September 2003).

Positive youth development through sport 37

Hellison, D. (1993) The coaching club—teaching responsibility to inner-city students, Journal of
Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 64(5), 66 – 70.

Hellison, D. (2003) Teaching responsibility through physical activity (2nd edn) (Champaign, IL,
Human Kinetics).

Hellison, D. R. & Cutforth, N. J. (1997) Extended day programs for urban children and youth: from
theory to practice, in: H. Walberg, O. Reyes & R. Weissberg (Eds) Children and youth: inter-
disciplinary perspectives (San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass), 223 – 249.

Hellison, D., Cutforth, N., Kallusky, J., Martinek, T., Parker, M., & Stiehl, J. (2000) Youth develop-
ment and physical activity. Linking universities and communities (Champaign, IL, Human
Kinetics).

Hill, G. (1988) Celebrate diversity (not specialization) in school sports, Executive Educator, 10, 24.
Hill, G. M. & Hansen, G. F. (1988) Specialization in high school sports—the pros and cons, Journal

of Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance, 59(5), 76 – 79.
Hill, G. M. & Simons, J. (1989) A study on sport specialization in high school athletes, Journal of

Sport and Social Issues, 13(1), 1 – 13.
Hollander, D. B., Meyers, M. C. & Arnold, L. (1995) Psychological factors associated with over-

training: implications for youth sport coaches, Journal of Sport Behavior, 18(1), 3 – 17.
James, C. (1995) Negotiating school through sports: African Canadian youth strive for academic

success, Avante, 1, 20 – 36.
Larson, R. W. (2000) Toward a psychology of positive youth development, American Psychologist, 55,

170 – 183.
Larson, R. W. & Richards, M. H. (1991) Boredom in the middle school years: blaming schools

versus blaming students, American Journal of Education, 99, 418 – 443.
Larson, R. W. & Verma, S. (1999) How children and adolescents spent time across the world: work,

play, and developmental opportunities, Psychological Bulletin, 125, 701 – 736.
Leffert, N., Benson, P., Scales, P., Sharma, A., Drake, D. & Blyth, D. (1998) Developmental assets:

measurement and prediction of risk behaviors among adolescents, Applied Developmental
Science, 2(4), 209 – 230.

Lemyre, P., Roberts, G. C. & Ommundsen, Y. (2002) Achievement goal orientations, perceived
ability, and sportspersonship in youth soccer, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 120 – 136.

Lerner, R. M., Fisher, C. B. & Weinberg, R. A. (2000) Toward a science for and of the people:
promoting civil society through the application of developmental science, Child Development,
71, 11 – 20.

Long, B. C. (1985) Stress-management interventions: a 15-month follow-up of aerobic condition-
ing and stress inoculation training, Cognitive Therapy and Research, 9, 471 – 478.

Manjone, J. (1998) International youth tour benefits. The Sport Journal, 1(1). Available online at:
www.thesportjournal.org/vol1no1/travel.htm (accessed 26 November 2003).

Marsh, M. W. (1993) The effects of participation in sport during the last 2 years of high-school,
Sociology of Sport Journal, 10, 18 – 43.

Martens, R. (1993) Psychological perspectives, in: B. R. Cahill & A. J. Pearl (Eds) Intensive partici-
pation in children’s sports (Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics), 9 – 18.

Martin, S. B., Jackson, A. W., Richardson, P. A. & Weiller, K. H. (1999) Coaching preferences of
adolescent youths and their parents, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 11, 247 – 262.

McMillan, J. H. & Reed, D. F. (1994) At-risk students and resiliency: factors contributing to
academic success, Clearing House, 67, 137 – 140.

Mize, M. (1991) Cognitive development: the physical education connection, Teaching Elementary
Physical Education, 2(1), 14 – 15.

National Research Council and Institute of Medicine (2002) Community programs to promote youth
development (Washington, National Academy Press).

Orlick, T. (1973) Children’s sports: a revolution is coming, Canadian Association for Health, Physical
Education, Recreation and Dance Journal, January – February Volume, 12 – 14.

38 J. L. Fraser-Thomas et al.

Orlick, T. (1974) The athletic dropout: a high price for inefficiency, Canadian Association for Health,
Physical Education, Recreation and Dance Journal, November – December Volume, 21 – 27.

Paffenbarger, R. S., Hyde, R. T., Wing, A. & Hsieh, C. C. (1986) Physical activity, all-cause
mortality, and longevity of college alumni, New England Journal of Medicine, 314, 605 – 613.

Park, N. (2004) The role of subjective well-being in positive youth development, The Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science, 591, 25 – 39.

Pelletier, L. G., Fortier, M. S., Vallerand, R. J. & Brière, N. M. (2001) Associations among
perceived autonomy support, forms of self-regulations, and persistence: a prospective
study, Motivation and Emotion, 25, 279 – 306.

Peterson, C. (2004) Positive social science, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science, 591, 186 – 201.

Pittman, K. J. (1991) Promoting youth development: strengthening the role of youth serving and
community organizations (Washington, Academy for Educational Development, Center for
Youth Development and Policy Research).

Powell, K. E., Thompson, K. D., Caspersen, C. J. & Kendrick, J. S. (1987) Physical activity and the
incidence of coronary heart disease, Annual Review of Public Health, 8, 253 – 287.

Raedeke, T. D. & Smith, A. L. (2001) Development and preliminary validation of an athlete
burnout measure, Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 23, 281 – 306.

Raglin, J. S. (1993) Overtraining and staleness: psychometric monitoring of endurance athletes, in:
R. N. Singer, M. Murphey & L. K. Tennant (Eds) Handbook of research on sport psychology
(New York, Macmillan), 840 – 850.

Reel, J. J. & Gill, D. L. (1996) Psychosocial factors related to eating disorders among high school
and college female cheerleaders, Sport Psychologist, 10, 195 – 206.

Robertson-Wilson, J., Baker, J., Derbyshire, E. & Côté, J. (2003) Childhood physical activity
involvement in active and inactive female adults, Avante, 9(1), 1 – 8.

Robinson, T. T. & Carron, A. V. (1982) Personal and situational factors associated with dropping
out versus maintaining participating in competitive sport, Journal of Sport Psychology, 4,
364 – 378.

Salminen, S. & Liukkonen, J. (1996) Coach – athlete relationship and coaching behavior in training
sessions, International Journal of Sport Psychology, 27, 59 – 67.

Sarrazin, P., Vallerand, R., Guillet, E., Pelletier, L. & Cury, F. (2002) Motivation and dropout in
female handballers: a 21-month prospective study, European Journal of Social Psychology,
32, 395 – 418.

Scales, P., Benson, P., Leffert, N. & Blyth, D. A. (2000) Contribution of developmental assets to the
prediction of thriving among adolescents, Applied Developmental Science, 4, 27 – 46.

Scales, P. & Leffert, N. (1999) Developmental assets: a synthesis of the scientific research on adolescent
development (Minneapolis, MN, Search Institute).

Scanlan, T. K., Carpenter, P., Schmidt, G., Simons, J., & Keeler, B. (1993) An introduction to the
sport commitment model, Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 15, 1 – 15.

Scanlan, T. K. & Lewthwaite, R. (1986) Social psychological aspects of competition for male youth
sport participants: IV. Predictors of enjoyment, Journal of Sport Psychology, 8, 25 – 35.

Segrave, J. (1983) Sport and juvenile delinquency, in: R. Terjung, (Ed.) Exercise and sport science
review. Vol. 11 (Philadelphia, Franklin Institute Press), 181 – 209.

Seppa, N. (1996) Keeping young athletic fires burning, APA Monitor. Available online at
www.apa.org/monitor/jul96/burnout.html. (accessed 10 August 1999).

Sheilds, D. L. L. & Bredemeier, B. J. L. (1995) Character development and physical activity
(Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics).

Siegenthaler, K. L. & Gonzalez, G. L. (1997) Youth sports as serious leisure, Journal of Sport and
Social Issues, 21, 298 – 314.

Shogan, D. (Ed.) (1999) The making of high-performance athletes: discipline, diversity, and ethics
(Toronto, University of Toronto Press).

Positive youth development through sport 39

Smith, R. E. (1986) Towards a cognitive-affective model of athletic burnout, Journal of Sport
Psychology, 8, 36 – 50.

Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L. & Curtis, B. (1978) Coaching behaviors in little league baseball, in:
F. L. Smoll & R. E. Smith (Eds) Psychological perspectives in youth sports (Washington,
Hemisphere Publishing Corporation), 173 – 201.

Smoll, F. L., Smith, R. E., Barnett, N. P. & Everett, J. J. (1993) Enhancement of children’s self-
esteem through social support training for youth sport coaches, Journal of Applied Psychology,
78, 602 – 610.

Snyder, E. E. & Spreitzer, E. (1990) High school athletic participation as related to college
attendance among Black, Hispanic, and White males: a research note, Youth and Society,
21, 390 – 398.

Soberlak, P. & Côté, J. (2003) Developmental activities of elite ice hockey players, Journal of Applied
Sport Psychology, 15, 41 – 49.

Steiner, H., McQuivery, R. W., Pavelski, R., Pitts, T. & Kraemer, H. (2000) Adolescents and sports:
risk or benefit? Clinical Pediatrics, 39, 161 – 166.

Stevens, D. A. (1994) Movement concepts: stimulating cognitive development in elementary
students, JOPERD, 65(8), 16 – 23.

Taylor, C. B., Sallis, J. F. & Needle, R. (1985) The relation of physical activity and exercise to mental
health, Public Health Report, 100, 195 – 202.

Tremblay, M. S., Katzmarzyk, P. T. & Willms, J. D. (2002) Temporal trends in overweight and
obesity in Canada, 1981 – 1996, International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders,
26(4), 538 – 543.

Wall, M. & Côté, J. (2004, September – October) The influence of early sport participation on future
sport investment or dropout, paper presented at the meeting of the Association of the Advance-
ment of Applied Sport Psychology, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Wankel, L. M. & Berger, B. G. (1990) The psychological and social benefits of sport and physical
activity, Journal of Leisure Research, 22(2), 167 – 182.

Wankel, L. M. & Kreisel, P. S. (1985) Factors underlying enjoyment of youth sports: sport and age
group comparisons, Journal of Sport Psychology, 7, 51 – 64.

Wankel, L. M. & Mummery, W. K. (1990) The psychological and social benefits of sport and phys-
ical activity, Journal of Leisure Research, 22, 167 – 182.

Weirsma, L. D. (2000) Risks and benefits of youth sport specialization, Pediatric Exercise Science, 12,
13 – 22.

Weitzer, J. E. (1989). Childhood socialization into physical activity: parental roles in perceptions of
competence and goal orientations. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Wisconsin-
Milwaukee.

Whitley, R. L. (1999) Those ‘dumb jocks’ are at it again: a comparison of the educational
performances of athletes and nonathletes in North Carolina high school from 1993
through 1996, High School Journal, 82, 223 – 233.

Wright, A. D. & Côté, J. (2003) A retrospective analysis of leadership development through sport,
The Sport Psychologist, 17, 268 – 291.

40 J. L. Fraser-Thomas et al.