Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorXiang, Ping
dc.contributor.advisorMcBride, Ron E.
dc.creatorSu, Xiaoxia
dc.date.accessioned2015-04-28T15:35:13Z
dc.date.available2016-12-01T06:36:13Z
dc.date.created2014-12
dc.date.issued2014-12-09
dc.date.submittedDecember 2014
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/154115
dc.description.abstractResearch has documented that summer sports camps can provide opportunities for social and physical benefits for at-risk boys who are often from low-income families and vulnerable to academic failure. However, whether these boys can reap such benefits is largely determined by their self-efficacy, including social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine at-risk boys’ social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy in a summer sports camp setting. Specifically, this study addressed the following research questions: (1) Can at-risk boys differentiate between social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy? (2) What level of social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy do at-risk boys in this sample display? (3) What is the relationship between social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy? (4) Do at-risk boys’ mean scores of social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy change over the course of the summer sports camp? (5) What are the predictive powers of social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy on behaviors, effort, and intention for future physical activity participation, and (6) What factors do at-risk boys perceive contributing to their social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy? The results of this study indicated that social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy were clearly distinguishable, but they were also positively related. Both of them significantly predicted prosocial behaviors, with social self-efficacy having stronger predictive power. Physical activity self-efficacy was a better predictor of effort and intention than social self-efficacy. Boys with higher levels of social self-efficacy or physical activity self-efficacy were more likely to display prosocial behaviors. Besides the sources proposed by Bandura’s self-efficacy theory, such as mastery experience, vicarious experience, social persuasion, and emotional and physiological reactions, boys also identified some unique sources contributing to their social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy. This study provides an initial effort using self-efficacy theory to understand at-risk boys’ behaviors, effort, and intention for future physical activity participation in a summer sports camp setting. Given the finding that social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy were related to their behaviors, effort, and intention, it is critical to enhance at-risk boys’ social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy in summer sports camps.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen
dc.subjectat-risk boysen
dc.subjectsummer sports campen
dc.subjectself-efficacyen
dc.subjectsocial developmenten
dc.subjectphysical activityen
dc.titleAt-Risk Boys' Self-Efficacy in A Summer Sports Campen
dc.typeThesisen
thesis.degree.departmentHealth and Kinesiologyen
thesis.degree.disciplineKinesiologyen
thesis.degree.grantorTexas A & M Universityen
thesis.degree.nameDoctor of Philosophyen
thesis.degree.levelDoctoralen
dc.contributor.committeeMemberGoodson, Patricia
dc.contributor.committeeMemberStough, Laura M.
dc.type.materialtexten
dc.date.updated2015-04-28T15:35:13Z
local.embargo.terms2016-12-01
local.etdauthor.orcid0000-0003-4643-6806


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record