Next Article in Journal
Assessment of the Factors Influencing the Performance of the Adoption of Green Logistics in Urban Tourism in Thailand’s Eastern Economic Corridor
Next Article in Special Issue
In the Absence of Testosterone: Hormonal Treatment, Masculinity, and Health among Prostate Cancer Patients Engaging in an Exercise Programme
Previous Article in Journal
Community Solutions for Community Problems: Reflections on a Civic Organisation Colloquium for Resolving Gangsterism in the Northern Areas of Gqeberha, Eastern Cape, South Africa
Previous Article in Special Issue
Rio 2016 Olympic Legacy for Residents of Favelas: Revisiting the Case of Vila Autódromo Five Years Later
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Social Sciences
Volume 12
Issue 5
10.3390/socsci12050299
socsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Developmental Outcomes for Young People Participating in Informal and Lifestyle Sports: A Scoping Review of the Literature, 2000–2020

by
Reidar Säfvenbom
1,
Anna-Maria Strittmatter
2,* and
Guro Pauck Bernhardsen
1,3
1
Department of Teacher Education and Outdoor Studies, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, 0863 Oslo, Norway
2
Department of Sport and Social Sciences, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, 0863 Oslo, Norway
3
Department of Research and Development, Division of Mental Health Services, Akershus University Hospital, 1478 Lørenskog, Norway
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Soc. Sci. 2023, 12(5), 299; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12050299
Submission received: 30 March 2023 / Revised: 2 May 2023 / Accepted: 4 May 2023 / Published: 11 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Sport and Social Issues)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The aim of this study is to review the literature on lifestyle sports and lifestyle sport contexts with regard to the developmental potential they may represent in young people’s everyday lives. The review applies a relational developmental systems approach to youth development. The eligibility criteria are based on the phenomenon of interest and outcomes. Hence, we include studies examining the associations between young people performing lifestyle sports and potential developmental outcomes: mental, biological, social, and behavioral. The present study shows that the volume of research on informal lifestyle sport is rather extensive and that studies on the way these activity contexts may affect developmental processes in youth are diverse and wide ranging. The studies suggest that performing lifestyle sports may have several beneficial health and skills outcomes. Furthermore, positive associations are suggested between involvement in lifestyle sport contexts such as climbing, snowboarding, parkour, tricking, kiting, and surfing and (a) mental outcomes such joy, happiness, freedom, euphoria, motivation, self-efficacy, and well-being; (b) social outcomes such as gender equality, network building, social inclusion, interaction, friendship; and (c) behavioral outcomes such as identity, creativity, and expressions of masculinity and/or femininity. The review performed indicates that lifestyle sport contexts are flexible according to needs and desires that exist among the practitioners and that the human and democratic origins of these contexts make them supportive for positive movement experiences and for positive youth development. The findings have implications for PE teachers, social workers, policymakers, sport organizations, and urban architecture, in that providing lifestyle sport opportunities in the everyday lives of young people will foster a holistic development in a positive way.

1. Introduction

Research has confirmed positive associations between participation in organized, traditional, and competitive youth sports and various variables promoting youth development (Agans et al. 2014; Green et al. 2015; Högman and Augustsson 2017). In line with these associations, governments and policymakers have funded national sport federations and promoted traditional sport contexts to support developmental processes in individuals and to combat health problems and social challenges in society (e.g., criminality and unemployment among youths), as well as means for educational attainment (Lindsey 2020; Strittmatter and Skille 2017).
However, during the last 50 years, the Western world has witnessed a change in societal movement cultures. Traditional and organized competitive sports still dominate the public domain, yet the movement culture has become more diverse in terms of new activities and thus new activity contexts based on different values and aims compared to traditional Olympic sports (see also King and Church 2015). In this new diversity, the growth of activities categorized under the umbrella term “lifestyle sports” (e.g., skateboarding, snowboarding, surfing, parkour, tricking, freeride skiing, longboarding, rock climbing, and other types of informal, explorative, and expressive movement activities) has garnered increased attention (Bignold 2013; Jonasson and Eriksson 2022; Rindler et al. 2022; Säfvenbom et al. 2018; Van Bottenburg and Salome 2010; Wheaton 2004; Wheaton et al. 2017). Research has shown that despite public concern regarding a lack of adult leaders and structure, the number of young people involved in these types of activity contexts has been steadily growing in many nations (Howell 2008; Jeanes et al. 2022; King and Church 2015; Thorpe 2012; Wheaton 2013) all over the world. In the early part of the research on lifestyle sports, these contexts were associated with some kind of subcultural positioning, but recent research has shown that the image of nonconformist outsiders has diminished. During the last 10 years, lifestyle sports have emerged and expanded in many ways. Yet, despite commercialization, sportification, and industrialization (Edwards and Corte 2014; Strittmatter et al. 2018), many young practitioners today who are involved in tricking, skateboarding, parkour, and other action- or adventure-oriented activities defend and practice the grassroots idea of participating in an independent, self-organized, and commitment-based alternative to traditional and competitive youth sports. Due to what seems to be a preferred absence of an authorized adult or instructor (Säfvenbom and Stjernvang 2020) and despite lack of governmental support (Jeanes et al. 2019), commitment-based, peer-oriented, and self-organized lifestyle sport contexts seem to persist as alternatives to traditional competitive youth sports, instructed by an appointed and formal authority.
The 20 years between 2000 and 2020 were characterized by an increasing interest in lifestyle sports. Although many studies during the last 20 years have considered lifestyle sport contexts as developmental assets for young people, this research has so far not been reviewed. This may have to do with a remaining notion of lifestyle sports as deviant, and of lifestyle sport contexts as unstructured groups of young people who engage in transgressive behaviors and who challenge existing values in sports (Midol and Broyer 1995, p. 210). The aim of this study is therefore to review the literature on lifestyle sports and lifestyle sport contexts with regard to the developmental potential they may represent in young people’s everyday lives.

A Relational Developmental Systems Approach

Studying the developmental outcomes of involvement with any potential developmental asset such as self-organized lifestyle sports requires an idea of what human development is. In other words, assessments of movement contexts as developmental contexts require an understanding of what human development processes require and thus what can be considered developmental outcomes.
Within contemporary developmental science, variants of relational developmental system (RDS) theories have been claimed as being at the cutting-edge of the field (Lerner 2018). RDS theories are anchored in a process-relational paradigm (Overton 2015), acknowledging that human development cannot be understood without focusing on developmental processes and interaction. From an RDS perspective, human development is a result of “person ↔ context relations within a certain culture and time of history” (Säfvenbom et al. 2018, p. 1992), and from this perspective, plasticity at both ends of the relationship is considered crucial for optimizing development processes. RDS theories offer this perspective to the study of development among young people in school and leisure contexts (Lerner et al. 2015; Lerner 2018) by analyzing “the goodness of fit” between individual characteristics of the person and current contextual specificities (e.g., lifestyle sports).
RDS models seek to understand human development by considering all parts of the person (biological, mental, social, and behavioral dimensions) and all parts of the environment (local, national, and international dimensions) as dynamic and relational systems (Lerner et al. 2015). Because these systems both affect each other and receive influence from each other in a mutual relationship within a given historical period, they cannot be considered independently of each other. Development occurs because of changes in and between these systems. Not all changes lead to development in a young person, but for development to occur, a change must occur in one of the many relational systems. Based on this process-relational understanding of human development, the present review approaches the existing literature on lifestyle sport contexts from an integrative human development perspective incorporating biological, psychological, sociological, and historical perspectives. The lifestyle sport contexts studied in this review represent the historical dimension in terms of being something new and different compared to traditional sports, whereas outcomes are studied as biological, social, mental, and behavioral outcomes.

2. Materials and Methods

This study is an overview of peer-reviewed publications examining lifestyle sports and developmental outcomes in youth published between 2000 and April 2020. We have performed a literature search in seven databases because we aimed to include the majority of publications in this period. The aim of the study was to determine the scope of the literature, allowing for multiple methodological approaches, participants, and activities. As such, the review qualifies as a scoping review and not a systematic review (see Munn et al. 2018).

2.1. Literature Search

One researcher (G. P. B.), with help from a librarian, searched for peer-reviewed publications in the databases of PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, ERIC, SPORTDiscus, EMBASE, and CINAHL in April 2020, using the following search words and combinations: (lifestyle sport* OR action sport* OR adventure sport* OR informal sport* OR alternative sport* OR extreme sport* OR self-organized sport* OR skateboard* OR snowboard* OR surfers or surfing OR bouldering OR rock climbing OR sport climbing OR traditional climbing OR indoor climbing OR parkour or tricking OR mountain bike OR beach volleyball OR street dance OR death diving OR frisbeegolf OR bossaball OR spikeball OR pickleball OR stand-up paddle surfing OR trampoline OR break dance OR circus OR drone racing OR freeski OR BMX OR longboard OR inline skating OR scootering OR ultimate frisbee OR bike polo OR capoeira) AND (youth* OR adolescent* OR young people OR young adult* OR children OR child OR teenager*). Where possible, the search was limited to peer-reviewed publications, publication year (2000 to April 2020), English language, and studies on humans.

2.2. Inclusion Criteria and Study Selection

One researcher (G. P. B.) assessed the retrieved studies for eligibility by reviewing the titles and/or abstracts using the software Distiller SR by Evidence Partners (Ottawa, ON, Canada, https://www.evidencepartners.com/products/distillersr-systematic-review-software, accessed on 1 April 2020), whereas full texts were divided between all authors and assessed for eligibility at the final stage. If there was uncertainty regarding inclusion or data extraction, this was discussed with the other authors before any decisions were made.
The eligibility criteria were as follows: Phenomenon of interest and outcomes: we included studies examining the associations between performing lifestyle sports and potential developmental outcomes (mental, biological, social, and behavioral). Although we recognize the importance of acquiring an overview of the literature examining the risk of injuries related to performing lifestyle sports, this was beyond the scope and feasibility of this review. Studies that examined injuries in lifestyle sports were therefore excluded from this overview article. Sample: the sample had to include participants between 10 and 25 years old, and they had to perform lifestyle sports. We excluded studies only examining competing athletes. We included both youth with and without disabilities/other health constraints. Design: we included qualitative and quantitative studies and had no exclusion criteria on study design. Publication type: we excluded theoretical or conceptual publications, publications not published in peer-reviewed journals, conference abstracts, and publications not written in English. Publication year: we excluded publications published prior to 1 January 2000.
The main reasons for the exclusion of publications at abstract and full-text screening were that the included participants did not perform lifestyle sports or studied competitive athletes; the publications were theoretical or conceptual papers or conference abstracts; there was no eligible outcome (mainly publications examining injuries).
The search resulted in 3866 potentially relevant studies after elimination of possible duplicates. From the initial search, 499 publications were included in the full-text assessment after screening the titles and abstracts. In total, 173 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the present overview of the literature. We divided all the included publications into categories based on outcome (biological, performance, mental, social, and behavioral). If a publication included more than one of the outcome categories (e.g., biological and mental), it was included in all relevant categories (Figure 1).

2.3. Data Extraction

Three researchers (R. S., A. M. S., and G. P. B.) shared the publications and extracted the following information: first author’s name, year of publication, sports performed, study design, outcome category, outcome, and main result.

3. Results

In line with our theoretical understanding of human development, we structured the results of our study in form of (a) biological and performance outcomes and (b) mental, social, and behavioral outcomes for young people’s participation in lifestyle sports. In this section, we provide a more descriptive overview before digging deeper and discussing the insights in the section that follows.

3.1. Biological and Performance Outcomes

Overall, the literature search resulted in 53 unique studies with biological and performance outcomes. The results from the studies are provided in Table 1 and were categorized as either beneficial, mixed (the study included several measures for the outcome and suggested both beneficial and no association), or having no association. Table 2 provides the references. The most studied outcome was metabolic cost or training intensity, and the results suggested that performing lifestyle sports is associated with an intensity or metabolic cost equivalent to the physical activity recommendations (at least moderate intensity). This applied for all the studied sports, except paragliding (Wilkes et al. 2018). Six out of eight studies suggested that performing climbing, trampolining, or surfing is associated with a more beneficial body composition or body weight. Twelve of fourteen studies suggested performing lifestyle sports benefits motor skills, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggesting effects of trampolining on jumping height (Atiković et al. 2018; Arabatzi 2018; Giagazoglou et al. 2013) and balance (Arabatzi 2018; Giagazoglou et al. 2013; Zhong et al. 2019), effects of inline skating on balance and jumping height (Muehlbauer et al. 2013), and effects of climbing on balance (Aykora 2019). Three studies suggested the benefits of performing climbing (Aras and Akalan 2016) or surfing (Clapham et al. 2020; Hignett et al. 2018) on cardiorespiratory fitness, whereas nine of fourteen studies suggested an association between performing lifestyle sports and muscle strength/endurance. Of these, one RCT study suggested muscle strength and endurance effects of rock climbing on left elbow flexion and extension, and right elbow extension, but not right elbow flexion (Aras and Akalan 2016); one RCT suggested effects of indoor climbing on core muscle and hand-grip strength (Muehlbauer et al. 2012); and one RCT suggested an effect of trampoline training on knee-muscle strength (Zhong et al. 2019). We found eight studies that examined the association between lifestyle sports (climbing, surfing, and trampolining) and flexibility. Overall, five of these studies suggested a beneficial association between performing these sports and flexibility (Clapham et al. 2018; Aykora 2019; Giagazoglou et al. 2013; Koca et al. 2019; Muehlbauer et al. 2012), whereas two showed mixed results (Armitano et al. 2015; Siegel et al. 2015). We found few studies examining lifestyle sports in relation to systolic and diastolic blood pressure (Hignett et al. 2018), bone mineral density (Sherk et al. 2010), and markers of inflammation (Momesso dos Santos et al. 2015). One RCT showed that trampolining might benefit cystic fibrosis patients by reducing disease symptoms (Kriemler et al. 2016), whereas other studies were unclear on the medical benefits of performing lifestyle sports in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy (Böhm et al. 2015) or cystic fibrosis (Currant and Mahony 2008). Three studies suggested that participation in climbing or skateboarding might improve skills in other sports (i.e., ice climbing and snowboarding, respectively; Kunzell and Lukas 2011).

3.2. Mental, Social, and Behavioral Outcomes

In the literature search, 124 unique studies that focused on mental, social, and behavioral outcomes were identified. The results of these studies are provided in Table 3, and they were categorized as either positive, negative, or neutral based on whether the outcome was considered favorable. Table 4 provides the references of the included studies. Although some studies only focused on one type of outcome, a major part of the literature found a mix of outcomes (see Table 3). Of the total numbers of studies, 13 unique studies showed positive associations between practicing lifestyle sports and changes in mental systems. Examples of mental outcomes from practicing lifestyle sports are joy and happiness, freedom, euphoria, motivation, self-efficacy, and well-being (e.g., Carlman and Hjalmarsson 2019; Motl et al. 2000). For example, Eckstein and Rüth (2015) found that activities such as rock-climbing have positive outcomes on attention and affect regulation for children and adolescent psychiatric inpatients. In addition to the 13 mentioned studies, we found 12 studies that solely included social outcomes, such as gender equality, network building, social inclusion and exclusion, interaction, and friendship (see, e.g., Müller and Mutz 2019; Sisjord 2012; Spencer-Cavaliere et al. 2017), and 13 studies that included only behavioral outcomes, such as identity, creativity, expressions of masculinity and/or femininity, knowledge development, risk taking, sporting behavior, and use of alcohol (see, e.g., Cheng and Tsaur 2012; Oriel et al. 2018; Säfvenbom and Stjernvang 2020).
However, the most frequent identified outcomes are the combination of social and behavioral outcomes (37 articles). One of the most identified outcomes was building of community, social participation, and identity construction, such as studies that showed lifestyle sports enhance the construction of gender identity—both masculinity and femininity—in skateboarding, snowboarding, and parkour (Atencio et al. 2013; Dupont 2014; Kelly et al. 2005; Kidder 2013; Thorpe 2010), which also affect social hierarchy. These mechanisms were shown in Dupont’s (2014) study on core and consumer skateboarders and in Sisjord’s (2009) study on various identities of female snowboarders. The outcome “identity within a community” was classified as a positive outcome because it enhances community and comradery (see e.g., Bradley 2010) and negative as a show of status (Edensor and Richards 2007) and enhancing social class differences. Table 3 shows additional examples of the identified outcomes.
One-fifth of the 124 studies reviewed included a mix of mental, behavioral, and social outcomes connected to lifestyle sports. An example is Wheaton et al.’s (2017) qualitative study identifying improved life chances, self-improvement, self-management, self-governance, and self-reliance among the young participants of a surfing program. Other examples of positive outcomes of this category are resilience, self-esteem, interpersonal relationships, and increased school attendance, which Momartin et al. (2018) identified among young refugees practicing capoeira. Loiselle et al. (2019) found increased self-perception and self-efficacy, enhanced participation levels, and decreased parental bonding among young people living with physical disabilities practicing circus activities.
Although most of the included studies are qualitative, several experiments and mixed-method studies were also examined. The study participants showed a variation of young people who were already regularly active in lifestyle sports, but also young people in general without specified physical activity behavior. Several studies covered marginalized young people (e.g., Ugolotti 2015), as well as people with physical and mental disabilities (e.g., Loiselle et al. 2019).

4. Discussion

We conducted the present review of the existing literature on potential developmental outcomes of lifestyle sports involvement among young persons because of the following: (a) the number of lifestyle sports, lifestyle sport practitioners, and thus lifestyle sport contexts is growing; (b) the informal structure, the nonconformist practice, and the lack of adult leaders within these contexts have been questioned regarding their effects on developmental processes among youth; and (c) a review of studies on informal lifestyle sport contexts and their developmental potential is lacking.
Initially, the present study shows that the volume of research on informal lifestyle sports is rather extensive and that studies on how these activity contexts may affect developmental processes in youth are diverse and wide ranging. The number of studies retrieved in our literature search shows that lifestyle sports are well established within the movement culture in Western societies and that this part of the movement culture has received an increase in scientific attention during the last decade. The final samples of 53 unique studies on biological and performance outcomes and 124 unique studies on mental, social, and behavioral outcomes have proven that alternative activities and thus alternative activity contexts have increasingly reached the interest of not only sports researchers but also researchers representing preventive and clinical medicine, sociology, psychology, and behavioral research.
The trajectory of published studies is one source of proof of this increased interest. Our findings from the literature review allow us to identify four distinct periods in the development of studies on lifestyle sports and youth participation: 2000–2005, 2006–2010, 2011–2015, and 2016–2020. The number of articles focusing on lifestyle sports and young people has steadily increased from period to period.
In 2000–2005, ten studies were found, of which only one focused on biological and performance outcomes. Among the studies during this time period, two-thirds only focused on one type of outcome and mostly on social or behavioral outcomes.
In the period between 2006 and 2010, we found 25 articles that qualified for inclusion in our review. Among these, we can see that the number of studies focusing on mental outcomes has increased. However, the majority still handle behavioral and social outcomes. Only five articles focused on biological and performance outcomes.
In the period of 2011–2015, 54 articles were found. In this period, studies on biological and performance outcomes increased to 21 in total. Among the other 33 articles, we found mixes of relational outcomes such as mental, behavioral, and social outcomes. Here, we can see that studies published during this time period include more complex outcomes that affect developmental processes in young people.
From 2016 to 2020, we witness a big jump in the number of published articles: 88 in total. However, the bigger jump is made in the articles with mental, behavioral, and social outcomes (61) than in the articles handling biological and performance outcomes (26). Regarding the former, more than half of the studies identified mental outcomes combined with other outcomes. This shows that mental outcomes have garnered increased attention within lifestyle sport research over the past decade. Also, in the most recent period, mostly positive associations were identified. This can be explained by an increase in knowledge about lifestyle sports (and their benefits) as a research area in general. We did not find any typical pattern regarding the type of outcomes in the biological and performance publications. However, it appears to be a tendency of a shift from cross-sectional studies in the early years, to a larger proportion of experimental studies from 2010 onward. Furthermore, the studies published in recent years also show a larger variety in the sports studied, whereas the vast majority of the earlier studies were performed on climbers.
The biological and performance publications suggest that performing lifestyle sports may have several beneficial health and skills outcomes. The different types of sports may have various health and fitness outcomes based on which body system is affected. For example, trampolining is suggested to increase jump performance (Aalizadeh et al. 2016; Arabatzi 2018; Giagazoglou et al. 2013), whereas climbing, an activity with a greater load on muscles in the upper body, is subsequently associated with improved grip and core strength (Muehlbauer et al. 2012), and so on. As long as the activity has an adequate intensity, load, or challenge, it has the potential to cause subsequent physiological adaptation and increased performance. It is therefore promising that several of the typical lifestyle sports, such as capoeira (Moreira et al. 2018), climbing (Siegel et al. 2015), skateboarding (Hetzler et al. 2011), and surfing (Bravo et al. 2016; LaLanne et al. 2017)—to mention a few—are associated with at least moderate intensity. In youth, moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) is associated with several health outcomes, and the World Health Organization (2020) recommends that children and adolescents accumulate at least 60 min of MVPA per day and that adults accumulate at least 150 min of MVPA per week. The age period, ranging from adolescence to early adulthood, is characterized by a rapid decline in the proportion meeting the recommended physical activity level (Steene-Johannessen et al. 2020). This decline is possibly largely explained by changes in activity pattern and domain, where the activities typically transition from being organized and competitive to more internally paced and noncompetitive (Van Der Zee et al. 2019). Lifestyle sports may therefore be an important arena when promoting movement activity to youth.
Although most of the studies included in this overview suggest beneficial biological and performance outcomes, it is also important to note that some studies have not (e.g., Gallotta et al. 2015; Siegel et al. 2015; Wilkes et al. 2018). However, some of the studies that showed no association were built on rather high-risk hypotheses. For instance, no effects were seen on the gait function of cerebral palsy patients performing climbing (Böhm et al. 2015). It should also be noted that none of the 53 reviewed studies indicated unbeneficial associations.
Based on existing knowledge on biological effects as dose–response relationships, some of the abovementioned associations between lifestyle sports and biological and performance outcomes were expected. However, although a dose–response relationship (Pate 1995) governs most biological benefits of movement activities, associations between such activities and mental, social, and behavioral systems are far more complex. Possible mental, social, and behavioral associations are not necessarily the result of the activity itself in terms of duration or intensity but may as well be related to norms, values, aims, power relations, and other dimensions that may affect the total context and thus also the relationship between the persons involved and the movement context. From a relational perspective, the possible mental, social, and behavioral associations rely on a relational fit between developmental trajectories of persons involved in a context, as well as what this particular context may offer to and require from the persons involved. Mental, social, and behavioral effects of involvement in movement contexts reflect a certain alignment between strengths of the youth (internal developmental assets) and developmental qualities in the movement context or asset (external developmental assets: (Benson et al. 2019): it reflects a match between what the youth must progress in during their ongoing developmental process, as well as how well the contexts satisfy these needs.
The presented review of 124 unique studies on possible mental, social, and behavioral outcomes of lifestyle sport involvement showed that 12 studies revealed negative associations and that 112 had positive associations. A majority of the studies indicating negative associations were conducted explicitly looking for unbeneficial associations, such as the work of Halldorsson et al. (2014), who investigated the relationship between adolescent sport participation and alcohol use, focusing on differences in sport contexts. Examples for neutral associations include the study by Kern et al. (2014), who identified that informal sports, such as skateboarding and free skiing, are associated with higher risk-taking among participants. We did not judge this outcome as either positive or negative for developmental processes; therefore, we labeled these studies as having neutral associations.
The remaining studies (N = 112) showed positive associations between involvement in lifestyle sport contexts, such as climbing, snowboarding, parkour, tricking, kiting, and surfing, and the following developmental outcomes: (a) mental outcomes such as joy, happiness, freedom, euphoria, motivation, self-efficacy, well-being, and so on; (b) social outcomes such as gender equality, network building, social inclusion, interaction, friendship, and so on; (c) behavioral outcomes such as identity, creativity, expressions of masculinity and/or femininity, knowledge development, risk-taking, sporting behavior, and alcohol consumption.
As already mentioned, the most frequent associations identified in the review were mixed associations that include various fusions of mental, social, and/or behavioral associations. Outcome variables such as improved life chances, self-improvement, self-management, self-governance, and self-reliance, as well as resilience and increased school attendance, rely on a variety of within-person resources that may develop in interaction with functional external developmental assets, and they represent typical comprehensive internal developmental assets that are of great importance for further development.
Prior research has argued that potential external developmental assets such as movement contexts must be flexible to the needs of their participants (Högman and Augustsson 2017) in order to become functional assets and that movement contexts do not become functional external assets until individuals undergo core developmental experiences with these assets. The present review supports prior research arguing that lifestyle sport contexts may function as an external asset and thus provide asset-building energy to young persons who are involved. The performed review indicates that skateboarding, snowboarding, surfing, parkour, tricking, B-boying, freeride skiing, longboarding, rock climbing, and other types of informal and expressive movement activities do have characteristics that are applicable for human development, not despite but because of the relaxed and easygoing format. The present review confirms prior research arguing that the dominant understanding of lifestyle sports as unorganized and unstructured rather than self-organized and self-structured is a misinterpretation (Säfvenbom et al. 2018). Even if the activities in many of the studies reviewed were not performed in their original contexts but moved into more organized or semiorganized formats, studies have indicated that the flexibility, exploration, and coactive production remained as major characteristics.
The diversity in the samples of youth involved in the studies reviewed is perhaps the most interesting finding. In the total sample of studies reviewed, almost one-third were conducted on minority groups such as the following: (a) youth requiring physical, cognitive, and/or psychosocial supports; (b) at-risk disengaged youth; (c) disabled youth facing mental health issues or social exclusion; and (d) refugees and youth in sites of war, conflict, or disaster. This unexpectedly high number of studies focusing on minorities and vulnerable groups of young people indicates that lifestyle sport contexts are considered an appropriate alternative to help young people not necessarily to become more physically active but to develop a better everyday life.

5. Limitations, Conclusions, and Implications

The inclusion and thus mix of subjects, activity contexts, and outcome variables studied from a mix of scientific approaches and designs are seen as both the strengths and limitations of the review presented. It embraces a wide range of combinations that exist, yet it also compares and counts results from what are usually seen as incompatible designs. Some of the publications have methodological limitations that preclude the possibility of making firm conclusions, and although the total number of publications could be considered substantial, few studies have examined each specific outcome. Therefore, further well-designed studies examining these associations are warranted.
However, in line with what scoping reviews have worked toward, we have indicated that the volume and pattern of the available literature covering a field have not yet been reviewed and that this unveils a rather large and heterogeneous nature (Peters et al. 2015). The relational developmental systems approach applied in the present study provides a rather complex picture of relationships between a variety of activity contexts (that represent possible external developmental assets), a variety of developmental variables (representing internal developmental systems), and a variety of human samples (that represent multiple developmental trajectories and developmental processes). The review performed includes all studies performed on lifestyle sports that advocate developmental outcomes of being involved over the period from 2000 to 2020. Therefore, it includes (a) all types of qualitative and quantitative studies performed; (b) all types of random, purposive, convenient, and other types or research samples that exist; (c) all types of movement activities and movement contexts that cover a very large spectrum of activities under the umbrella definition of lifestyle sports; and, finally, (d) all types of people that cover the very large spectrum under the umbrella definition of youth. This means that the present study includes RCTs on, for instance, how climbing can affect muscle strength and endurance among participants with cerebral palsy, but it also includes qualitative and cross-sectional studies on a variety of behavioral outcomes among random children and young people participating in lifestyle sports such as surfing, climbing, Ultimate Frisbee, parkour, street dance, and capoeira. Although we have performed a comprehensive literature search aiming to include the majority of publications in this field, we cannot guarantee that we have not overlooked some publications. It was beyond the scope of this manuscript to perform a systematic review on such a broad topic, and as such, many of the criteria for a systematic literature search have not been fulfilled. As a next step, systematic reviews with narrower research questions, e.g., focusing on one specific outcome and study design, are warranted.
The review performed indicates that lifestyle sport contexts are flexible according to the needs and desires that exist among the practitioners and that the human and democratic origins of these contexts make them supportive for positive movement experiences (Agans et al. 2014) and for positive youth development. The findings have implications for PE teachers, social workers, policymakers, sport organizations, and urban architecture. It is reasonable to conclude that the very first review of literature on lifestyle sports and youth development highlights the importance of promoting lifestyle sports as something different from and thus an alternative to both organized sport contexts and fitness contexts.

Author Contributions

The article has been produced by all authors in a mutual collaboration. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was co-funded by Tverga: https://tverga.no/.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Aalizadeh, Bahman, Hassan Mohammadzadeh, Ali Khazani, and Ali Dadras. 2016. Effect of a trampoline exercise on the anthropometric measures and motor performance of adolescent students. International Journal of Preventive Medicine 7: 91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Agans, Jennifer P., Robey B. Champine, Lisette M. DeSouza, Megan Kiely Mueller, Sara Kassie Johnson, and Richard M. Lerner. 2014. Activity involvement as an ecological asset: Profiles of participation and youth outcomes. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 43: 919–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Anderson, Kristin L. 2001. Snowboarding: The construction of gender in an emerging sport. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 23: 55–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Arabatzi, Fotini. 2018. Adaptations in movement performance after plyometric training on mini-trampoline in children. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 58: 66–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Aras, Dicle, and Cengiz Akalan. 2016. Sport climbing as a means to improve health-related physical fitness parameters. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 56: 1304–10. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  6. Armitano, Cortney N., Emily D. Clapham, Linda S. Lamont, and Jennifer G. Audette. 2015. Benefits of surfing for children with disabilities: A pilot study. Palaestra 29: 31–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Arvidsen, Jan, Helle Johannessen, Jenny Veitch, and Søren Andkjær. 2020. It’s fun in the legs’: Children’s dwelling in garden trampolines. Childrens Geographies 18: 312–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ashworth, Dianne. 2017. Can Communitas Explain How Young People Achieve Identity Development in Outdoor Adventure in Light of Contemporary Individualised Life? Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 17: 216–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Atencio, Matthew, Becky Beal, and Emily Chivers Yochim. 2013. “It ain’t just Black kids and White kids”: The representation and reproduction of authentic “skurban” masculinities. Sociology of Sport Journal 30: 153–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Atencio, Matthew, E. Missy Wright, Becky Beal, and Zánean McClain. 2019. Urban skateboarding, social enterprise groups, and community capacity-building in the San Francisco Bay area. Society & Leisure 42: 432–49. [Google Scholar]
  11. Atiković, Almir, Amra Nožinović Mujanović, Jasmin Mehinović, Edin Mujanović, and Jasmin Bilalić. 2018. Effects of a Mini-Trampoline Exercise During 15 Weeks For Increasing Vertical Jump Performance. Sport Scientific & Practical Aspects 15: 11–19. [Google Scholar]
  12. Aykora, Emarah. 2019. An Analysis over Physical and Physiological Parameters of Elementary School Children Taking Part in a Sport Climbing Exercise. Universal Journal of Educational Research 7: 624–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Backstrom, Åsa. 2013. Gender Manoeuvring in Swedish Skateboarding: Negotiations of Femininities and the Hierarchical Gender Structure. YOUNG 21: 29–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Backstrom, Åsa, and Anne-Lene Sand. 2019. Imagining and Making Material Encounters: Skateboarding, Emplacement, and Spatial Desire. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 43: 122–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Balas, Jiří, Barbora Strejcová, Tomáš Malý, Lucia Malá, and Andrew J. Martin. 2009. Changes in upper body strength and body composition after 8 weeks indoor climbing in youth. Isokinetics and Exercise Science 17: 173–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Barlow, Matthew J., Karen Gresty, Malcolm Findlay, Carlton B. Cooke, and Mark A. Davidson. 2014. The effect of wave conditions and surfer ability on performance and the physiological response of recreational surfers. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 28: 2946–53. [Google Scholar]
  17. Beal, Becky. 2001. Disqualifying the official: An exploration of social resistance through the subculture of skateboarding. Sociology of Sport Journal 12: 252–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Beal, Becky, and Belinda Wheaton. 2003. Keeping it real’: Subcultural media and the discourses of authenticity in alternative sport. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 38: 155–76. [Google Scholar]
  19. Benson, Peter L., Eugene C. Roehlkepartain, and Stacey P. Rude. 2019. Spiritual development in childhood and adolescence: Toward a field of inquiry. Applied Developmental Science 7: 205–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bernadowski, C. 2017. Alternative to team sports: The effects of Parkour on children, adolescents and young adults—A case study. International Journal of Physical Education 54: 31–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Bignold, Wendy J. 2013. Developing school students’ identity and engagement through lifestyle sports: A case study of unicycling. Sport, Education and Society 18: 184–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Blasing, Bettina E., Iris Güldenpenning, Dirk Koester, and Thomas Schack. 2014. Expertise affects representation structure and categorical activation of grasp postures in climbing. Frontiers in Psychology 5: 1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Board, Wayne J., and Raymond C. Browning. 2014. Self-selected speeds and metabolic cost of longboard skateboarding. European Journal of Applied Physiology 114: 2381–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Böhm, Harald, Miki Katharina Rammelmayr, and Leonhard Döderlein. 2015. Effects of climbing therapy on gait function in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy—A randomized, controlled crossover trial. European Journal of Physiotherapy 17: 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bowers, Matthew T., B. Christine Green, Florian Hemme, and Laurence Chalip. 2014. Assessing the Relationship between Youth Sport Participation Settings and Creativity in Adulthood. Creativity Research Journal 26: 314–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bradley, Graham L. 2010. Skate parks as a context for adolescent development. Journal of Adolescent Research 25: 288–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bravo, Michelle M., Kevin M. Cummins, Jeff A. Nessler, and Sean C. Newcomer. 2016. Heart Rate Responses of High School Students Participating in Surfing Physical Education. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 30: 1721–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Budzynski-Seymour, Emily, Matthew Wade, Rachel Lawson, Alex Lucas, and James Steele. 2019. Heart rate, energy expenditure, and affective responses from children participating in trampoline park sessions compared with traditional extra-curricular sports clubs. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 59: 1747–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Carlman, Peter, and Maria Hjalmarsson. 2019. A sport for all programme in school: Girls’ experiences. Sport in Society 22: 416–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Cavanaugh, Lauren Katrina, and Sarah Beth Rademacher. 2014. How a SURFing Social Skills Curriculum Can Impact Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Journal of the International Association of Special Education 15: 27–35. [Google Scholar]
  31. Ceciliani, Andrea, Luca Bardella, Maria Letizia Grasso, Annalisa Zabonati, and Claudio Robazza. 2008. Effects of a Physical Education Program on Children’s Attitudes and Emotions Associated with Sport Climbing. Perceptual and Motor Skills 106: 775–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Cheng, Tien-Ming, and Sheng-Hshiung Tsaur. 2012. The relationship between serious leisure characteristics and recreation involvement: A case study of Taiwan’s surfing activities. Leisure Studies 31: 53–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Clapham, Emily D., Linda S. Lamont, Minsuk Shim, Shabnam Lateef, and Cortney N. Armitano. 2020. Effectiveness of surf therapy for children with disabilities. Disability and Health Journal 13: 100828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Clapham, Emily D., Minsuk Shim, Linda S. Lamont, and Cortney Armitano. 2018. A case report illustrating the implementation of a therapeutic surfing intervention for an adolescent with autism. Palaestra 32: 49–53. [Google Scholar]
  35. Cohen, Adam, and Jon Welty Peachey. 2015. Quidditch: Impacting and benefiting participants in a non-fictional manner. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 39: 521–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Cotterill, Stewart T., and Hazel Brown. 2018. An Exploration of the Perceived Health, Life Skill and Academic Benefits of Dinghy Sailing for 9–13-Year-Old School Children. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 18: 227–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Cross, Reid. 2002. The Effects of an Adventure Education Program on Perceptions of Alienation and Personal Control among At-Risk Adolescents. Journal of Experiential Education 25: 247–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Currant, J., and M. Mahony. 2008. Trampolining as an adjunct to regular physiotherapy in children with cystic fibrosis. Irish Medical Journal 101: 188. [Google Scholar]
  39. De Araujo, Pires, José Angelo Barela, Melissa Leandro Celestino, and Ana Maria Forti Barela. 2012. Contribution of Different Contents of Physical Education Classes in Elementary School for the Development of Basic Motor Skills. Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte 18: 153–57. [Google Scholar]
  40. Dumas, Alex, and Sophie Laforest. 2009. Skateparks as a health-resource: Are they as dangerous as they look? Leisure Studies 28: 19–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Dupont, Tyler. 2014. From core to consumer: The informal hierarchy of the skateboard scene. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 43: 556–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Eckstein, Florian, and Ulrich Rüth. 2015. Adventure-based experiential therapy with inpatients in child and adolescent psychiatry: An approach to practicability and evaluation. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning 15: 53–63. [Google Scholar]
  43. Edensor, Tim, and Sophia Richards. 2007. Snowboarders vs skiers: Contested choreographies of the slopes. Leisure Studies 26: 97–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Edwards, Bob, and Ugo Corte. 2014. Commercialization and lifestyle sport: Lessons from 20 years of freestyle BMX in ‘Pro-Town, USA’. In The Consumption and Representation of Lifestyle Sports. Edited by B. Wheaton. Oxfordshire: Routledge, pp. 79–95. [Google Scholar]
  45. Ennis, Gretchen Marie, and Jane Tonkin. 2018. It’s like exercise for your soul’: How participation in youth arts activities contributes to young people’s wellbeing. Journal of Youth Studies 21: 340–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Espana-Romero, Vanesa, Randall L. Jensen, Xavier Sanchez, Megan L. Ostrowski, Jay E. Szekely, and Phillip B. Watts. 2012. Physiological responses in rock climbing with repeated ascents over a 10-week period. European Journal of Applied Physiology 112: 821–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Evin, Agathe, Carole Sève, and Jacques Saury. 2014. Construction of trust judgments within cooperative dyads. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 19: 221–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Fencl, Matthew, Jennifer Muras, Jeff Steffen, Rebecca Battista, and Abdulaziz Elfessi. 2011. Physiological Effects of Bouldering Activities in Upper Elementary School Students. Physical Educator 68: 199–209. [Google Scholar]
  49. Fernández-Río, Javier, and Carlos Suarez. 2016. Feasibility and students’ preliminary views on parkour in a group of primary school children. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 21: 281–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Fletcher, Eric, and Heather Prince. 2017. Steering a Course towards Eudaimonia: The Effects of Sail Training on Well-Being and Character. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 17: 179–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Frühauf, Anika, Julian Zenzmaier, and Martin Kopp. 2020. Does Age Matter? A Qualitative Comparison of Motives and Aspects of Risk in Adolescent and Adult Freeriders. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine 19: 112–20. [Google Scholar]
  52. Frumberg, David, Alexis Gerk, Patrick Autruong, Katherine Flynn, Zhaoxing Pan, and Frank Chang. 2019. Adaptive Skiing/Snowboarding Affects the Quality of Life of Children With Disabilities. Palaestra 33: 21–26. [Google Scholar]
  53. Fryer, Simon, Keeron J. Stone, Joakim Sveen, Tabitha Dickson, Vanesa España-Romero, Dave Giles, J. Baláš, Lee Stoner, and Nick Draper. 2017. Differences in forearm strength, endurance, and hemodynamic kinetics between male boulderers and lead rock climbers. European Journal of Sport Science 17: 1177–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Gallotta, Maria Chiara, Gian Pietro Emerenziani, Maria Dolores Monteiro, Luigi Iasevoli, Sara Iazzoni, Carlo Baldari, and Laura Guidetti. 2015. Psychophysical Benefits of Rock-Climbing Activity. Perceptual and Motor Skills 121: 675–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Geertman, Stephanie, Danielle Labbé, Julie-Anne Boudreau, and Olivier Jacques. 2016. Youth-Driven Tactics of Public Space Appropriation in Hanoi: The Case of Skateboarding and Parkour. Pacific Affairs 89: 591–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Giagazoglou, Paraskevi, Dimitrios Kokaridas, Maria Sidiropoulou, Asterios Patsiaouras, Chrisanthi Karra, and Konstantina Neofotistou. 2013. Effects of a trampoline exercise intervention on motor performance and balance ability of children with intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities 34: 2701–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Gieseler, Carly, and S. N. Sheppard. 2019. Learning to Fail: Adolescent Resistance in Extreme Sports. Journal of Sport & Social Issues 43: 276–95. [Google Scholar]
  58. Gilchrist, Paul, and Belinda Wheaton. 2011. Lifestyle sport, public policy and youth engagement: Examining the emergence of parkour. International Journal of Sport Policy 3: 109–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Godfrey, Cath, Hannah Devine-Wright, and Joe Taylor. 2015. The positive impact of structured surfing courses on the wellbeing of vulnerable young people. Community Practitioner: The Journal of the Community Practitioners’ & Health Visitors’ Association 88: 26–29. [Google Scholar]
  60. Green, Ken, Miranda Thurston, and Odd Vaage. 2015. Isn’t it good, Norwegian wood? Lifestyle and adventure sports participation among Norwegian youth. Leisure Studies 34: 529–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Grospretre, Sidney, and Romuald Lepers. 2016. Performance characteristics of Parkour practitioners: Who are the traceurs? European Journal of Sport Science 16: 526–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Grospretre, Sidney, Philippe Gimenez, and Alain Martin. 2018. Neuromuscular and electromechanical properties of ultra-power athletes: The traceurs. European Journal of Applied Physiology 118: 1361–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Halldorsson, Vidar, Thorolfur Thorlindsson, and Inga Dora Sigfusdottir. 2014. Adolescent sport participation and alcohol use: The importance of sport organization and the wider social context. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 49: 311–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Harper, Nevin J., and Anthony L. Webster. 2017. Higher learning: Impacts of a high-altitude adventure-based field school on college student development. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 17: 67–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Heirene, Robert M., David Shearer, Gareth Roderique-Davies, and Stephen D. Mellalieu. 2016. Addiction in Extreme Sports: An Exploration of Withdrawal States in Rock Climbers. Journal of Behavioral Addictions 5: 332–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Heller, Carrie, and Lauren A. Taglialatela. 2018. Circus Arts Therapy® fitness and play therapy program shows positive clinical results. International Journal of Play Therapy 27: 69–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Henstock, Murray, Katrina Barker, and Jorge Knijnik. 2013. 2, 6, Heave! Sail Training’s Influence on the Development of Self-Concept and Social Networks and Their Impact on Engagement with Learning and Education. A Pilot Study. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education 17: 32–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Hetzler, Ronald K., Ian Hunt, Christopher D. Stickley, and Iris F. Kimura. 2011. Selected metabolic responses to skateboarding. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 82: 788–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Hignett, Amanda, Mathew P. White, Sabine Pahl, Rebecca Jenkin, and Mod Le Froy. 2018. Evaluation of a surfing programme designed to increase personal well-being and connectedness to the natural environment among “at risk” young people. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 18: 53–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Högman, Johan, and Christian Augustsson. 2017. To play or not to play, that’s the question–young people’s experiences of organized spontaneous sport. Sport in Society 20: 1134–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Holland-Smith, David, Aharon Love, and Ross Lorimer. 2013. British surfers and their attitudes and values toward the environment. Ecopsychology 5: 103–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Hollett, Ty. 2019. Symbiotic learning partnerships in youth action sports: Vibing, rhythm, and analytic cycles. Convergence 25: 753–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Hortiguela, David, Carlos Gutierrez-Garcia, and Alejandra Hernando-Garijo. 2017. Combat versus team sports: The effects of gender in a climate of peer-motivation, and levels of fun and violence in physical education students. Ido Movement for Culture-Journal of Martial Arts Anthropology 17: 11–20. [Google Scholar]
  74. Howell, Ocean. 2008. Skatepark as neoliberal playground: Urban governance, recreation space, and the cultivation of personal responsibility. Space and Culture 11: 475–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Jeanes, Ruth, Dawn Penney, Justen O’Connor, Ramon Spaaij, Eibhlish O’Hara, Jonathan Magee, and Lisa Lymbery. 2022. Spatial justice, informal sport and Australian community sports participation. Leisure Studies 2022: 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Jeanes, Ruth, Ramón Spaaij, Dawn Penney, and Justen O’Connor. 2019. Managing informal sport participation: Tensions and opportunities. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics 11: 79–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Jonasson, Kalle, and Jonnie Eriksson. 2022. Surfing in the Society of Control: The Parkour Chase in Casino Royale as a Staging of Social Change. Social Sciences 11: 357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Jones, Rodney H. 2011. Sport and re/creation: What skateboarders can teach us about learning. Sport, Education & Society 16: 593–611. [Google Scholar]
  79. Kelly, Deirdre M., Shauna Pomerantz, and Dawn Currie. 2005. Skater girlhood and emphasized femininity: ‘You can’t land an ollie properly in heels’. Gender and Education 17: 229–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Kern, Laurence, Annie Geneau, Sophie Laforest, Alex Dumas, Benoit Tremblay, Claude Goulet, Sylvie Lepage, and Tracie A. Barnett. 2014. Risk perception and risk-taking among skateboarders. Safety Science 62: 370–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Kidder, Jeffrey L. 2013. Parkour, masculinity, and the city. Sociology of Sport Journal 30: 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Kijima, Akira, Morio Arimoto, and Shigeru Muramatsu. 2007. Metabolic equivalents during scooter exercise. Journal of Physiological Anthropology 26: 495–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. King, Katherine, and Andrew Church. 2015. Questioning policy, youth participation and lifestyle sports. Leisure Studies 34: 282–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. King, Katherine, and Andrew Church. 2020. Beyond transgression: Mountain biking, young people and managing green spaces. Annals of Leisure Research 23: 203–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Klos, Karolina, Czesław Giemza, and Alicja Dziuba-Słonina. 2019. Body balance in people practicing snowboarding. Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics 21: 97–101. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  86. Koca, Tuba Tülay, Murat Baykara, Adnan Demirel, and Ejder Berk. 2019. Comparing the effect of two different exercise types, minitrampoline and fast-walking to gastrocnemius/soleus muscle elasticity by sonoelastrography. European Research Journal 5: 588–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Kriellaars, Dean J., John Cairney, Marco AC Bortoleto, Tia KM Kiez, Dean Dudley, and Patrice Aubertin. 2019. The Impact of Circus Arts Instruction in Physical Education on the Physical Literacy of Children in Grades 4 and 5. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 38: 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Kriemler, Susi, Thomas Radtke, Gregor Christen, Marta Kerstan-Huber, and Helge Hebestreit. 2016. Short-term effect of different physical exercises and physiotherapy combinations on sputum expectoration, oxygen saturation, and lung function in young patients with cystic fibrosis. Lung 194: 659–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Kunzell, Stefan, and Simon Lukas. 2011. Facilitation effects of a preparatory skateboard training on the learning of snowboarding. Kinesiology 43: 56–63. [Google Scholar]
  90. Kutty, Nizal Abdul Majeed, Mohammed Abdul Razzaq Jabbar, and Yip Soon Ving. 2017. Effects of Trampoline Exercise on Attentional Control and Daytime Sleepiness among Young Adults with Anxiety Disorders in Malaysia. Disability, CBR & Inclusive Development 28: 96–109. [Google Scholar]
  91. L’Aoustet, Olivier, and Jean Griffet. 2001. The Experience of Teenagers at Marseilles’ Skate Park. Cities 18: 413–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Lai, Angel Hor Yan, Cheryl Hiu-Kwan Chui, Sasha Yuanjie Deng, and Lucy P. Jordan. 2020. Social Resources for Positive Psychosocial Health: Youths’ Narratives of a Street Dance Performing Arts Program. Journal of Social Service Research 47: 143–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. LaLanne, Christine L., Michael S. Cannady, Joseph F. Moon, Danica L. Taylor, Jeff A. Nessler, George H. Crocker, and Sean C. Newcomer. 2017. Characterization of Activity and Cardiovascular Responses During Surfing in Recreational Male Surfers Between the Ages of 18 and 75 Years Old. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity 25: 182–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Lau, Claudia, Jerrald Goodloe, Janice Eatman-Williams, Rebecca Dudovitz, and Susan Wentz. 2016. Dancetricians: A street dance intervention to improve physical activity self-efficacy and motivation among urban minority school children. Pediatrics 141: 182–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Leather, Mark, and Fiona Nicholls. 2016. More than activities: Using a ‘sense of place’ to enrich student experience in adventure sport. Sport, Education & Society 21: 443–64. [Google Scholar]
  96. Lerner, Richard M. 2018. Concepts and Theories of Human Development, 4th ed. Oxfordshire: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  97. Lerner, Richard M., Sara K. Johnson, and Mary H. Buckingham. 2015. Relational developmental systems-based theories and the study of children and families: Lerner and Spanier 1978 revisited. Journal of Family Theory & Review 7: 83–104. [Google Scholar]
  98. Levin, Kasper. 2016. Aesthetics of Hyperactivity: A Study of the Role of Expressive Movement in ADHD and Capoeira. American Journal of Dance Therapy 38: 41–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Levin, Kasper. 2018. The Dance of Attention: Toward an Aesthetic Dimension of Attention-Deficit. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science 52: 129–51. [Google Scholar]
  100. Light, Richard, and Melanie Nash. 2006. Learning and Identity in Overlapping Communities of Practice: Surf Club, School and Sports Clubs. Australian Educational Researcher 33: 75–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Lima, Rubianne. 2017. Balance Assessment in Deaf Children and Teenagers Prior to and Post Capoeira Practice through the Berg Balance Scale. The International Tinnitus Journal 21: 77–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Lindsey, Iain. 2020. Analysing policy change and continuity: Physical education and school sport policy in England since 2010. Sport, Education and Society 25: 27–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Lirgg, Cathy D., Ro Di Brezzo, and Michelle Gray. 2006. Effect of Climbing Wall Use on the Grip Strength of Fourth-Grade Students. (Abstract). Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport 77: A-64. [Google Scholar]
  104. Loiselle, Frédéric, Annie Rochette, Sylvie Tétreault, Michel Lafortune, and Josée Bastien. 2019. Social circus program (Cirque du Soleil) promoting social participation of young people living with physical disabilities in transition to adulthood: A qualitative pilot study. Developmental Neurorehabilitation 22: 250–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Madueno, Maria C., Crystal O. Kean, and Aaron T. Scanlan. 2017. The sex-specific internal and external demands imposed on players during Ultimate Frisbee game-play. The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 57: 1407–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Marshall, Jamie, Paul Kelly, and Ailsa Niven. 2019. When I Go There, I Feel Like I Can Be Myself. Exploring Programme Theory within the Wave Project Surf Therapy Intervention. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16: 2159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Mazzoni, E. R., K. Southward, J. K. Temple, R. E. Rhodes, N. Virji-Babul, and P. L. Purves. 2006. Effect of indoor rock climbing on self-efficacy and self-perception of children with special needs: A pilot project ACHPER. Healthy Lifestyles Journal 26: 259–73. [Google Scholar]
  108. Mazzoni, Erin R., P. Lynn Purves, Julie Southward, Ryan E. Rhodes, and Viviene A. Temple. 2009. Effect of indoor wall climbing on self-efficacy and self-perceptions of children with special needs. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 26: 259–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. McCulloch, Kenneth, P. McLaughlin, Peter Allison, V. Edwards, and Lyn Tett. 2010. Sail training as education: More than mere adventure. Oxford Review of Education 36: 661–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. McGuire, Francis A., and Mandy Marion Boyd Harrison. 2008. An investigation of the influence of vicarious experience on perceived self-efficacy. Journal of Experiental Education 28: 257–58. [Google Scholar]
  111. Méndez-Alonso, Antonio, Javier Fernández-Río, and David Méndez-Alonso. 2015. Sport Education Model Versus Traditional Model: Effects On Motivation And Sportsmanship. Revista Internacional de Medicina y Ciencias de la Actividad Física y del Deporte 15: 449–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Merrick, Darien, Kyle Hillman, Alice Wilson, Delphine Labbé, Alex Thompson, and W. Ben Mortenson. 2020. All aboard: Users’ experiences of adapted paddling programs. Disability and Rehabilitation 43: 2945–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Midol, Nancy, and Gerard Broyer. 1995. Toward an anthropological analysis of new sport cultures: The case of whiz sports in France. Sociology of Sport Journal 12: 204–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Mom, Shakeh, Mariano Coello, Emma Pittaway, Russell Downham, and Jorge Aroche. 2019. Capoeira Angola: An alternative intervention program for traumatized adolescent refugees from war-torn countries. Torture 29: 85–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Momartin, Shakeh, Edielson da Silva Miranda, Jorge Aroche, and Mariano Coello. 2018. Resilience building through alternative intervention: ‘STARTTS “Project Bantu Capoeira Angola”’; on the road to recovery. Intervention 16: 154–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Momesso dos Santos, Cesar Miguel, Fabio Takeo Sato, Maria Fernanda Cury-Boaventura, Silvia Helena Guirado-Rodrigues, Kim Guimaraes Cacula, Cristiane Cassoni Goncalves Santos, and Elaine Hatanaka. 2015. Effect of regular circus physical exercises on lymphocytes in overweight children. PLoS ONE 10: e0120262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Moore, Adam M., Emily D. Clapham, and Theresa A. Deeney. 2017. Parents’ Perspectives on Surf Therapy for Children with Disabilities. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education 65: 304–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Moore, Michele J., and Chudley E. Chad Werch. 2005. Sport and physical activity participation and substance use among adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health 36: 486–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Moreira, Sérgio R., Alfredo A. Teixeira-Araujo, Eduardo S. Numata Filho, Milton R. Moraes, and Herbert G. Simões. 2018. Psychophysiological characterization of different capoeira performances in experienced individuals: A randomized controlled trial. PLoS ONE 13: e0207276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Morgan, Paul. 2010. Get Up. Stand Up.’ Riding to resilience on a surfboard. Child & Family Social Work 15: 56–65. [Google Scholar]
  121. Morrissey, Sean Afnan. 2008. Performing Risks: Catharsis, Carnival and Capital in the Risk Society. Journal of Youth Studies 11: 413–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Motl, Robert W., Bonnie G. Berger, and Patrick S. Leuschen. 2000. The role of enjoyment in the exercise-mood relationship. International Journal of Sport Psychology 31: 347–63. [Google Scholar]
  123. Muehlbauer, Thomas, M. Stuerchler, and Urs Granacher. 2012. Effects of climbing on core strength and mobility in adults. International Journal of Sports Medicine 33: 445–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Muehlbauer, Thomas, Matthias Kuehnen, and Urs Granacher. 2013. Inline skating for balance and strength promotion in children during physical education. Perceptual and Motor Skills 117: 665–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Müller, Johannes, and Michael Mutz. 2019. On the search for social esteem: An ethnography on the meanings of football for marginalized male migrants. YOUNG 27: 336–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Munn, Zachary, Micah D. J. Peters, Cindy Stern, Catalin Tufanaru, Alexa McArthur, and Edoardo Aromataris. 2018. Systematic review or scoping review. Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology 18: 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Mutz, Michael, Johannes Müller, and Arne Göring. 2019. Outdoor adventures and adolescents’ mental health: Daily screen time as a moderator of changes. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 19: 56–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Norton, Christine Lynn, Anita Tucker, Mollie Farnham-Stratton, Federico Borroel, and Annette Pelletier. 2019. Family Enrichment Adventure Therapy: A Mixed Methods Study Examining the Impact of Trauma-Informed Adventure Therapy on Children and Families Affected by Abuse. Journal of Child and Adolescent Trauma 12: 85–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Oriel, Kathryn N., Jennifer Wood Kanupka, Adam T. Fuehrer, Kayla M. Klumpp, Katelyn N. Stoltz, Daniel W. Willey, and Michael L. Decvalcante. 2018. The impact of a rock climbing program for adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: A pilot study. International Journal of Kinesiology in Higher Education 2: 113–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Overton, Willis F. 2015. Processes, relations and relational-developmental-systems. In Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science: Vol. 1. Theory and Method, 7th ed. Edited by Willis F. Overton, Peter Molenaar and Richard M. Lerner. New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 9–62. [Google Scholar]
  131. PanáČková, Michaela, Jiří Baláš, Václav Bunc, and David Giles. 2014. Physiological demands of indoor wall climbing in children. Sports Technology 7: 183–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Pate, Russell R. 1995. Physical activity and health: Dose-response issues. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 66: 313–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Peters, Micah DJ, Christina M. Godfrey, Hanan Khalil, Patricia McInerney, Deborah Parker, and Cassia Baldini Soares. 2015. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare 13: 141–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Petracovschi, Simona. 2012. Street Dance: A Branch Of Sports For All. Sport & Society 12: 155–63. [Google Scholar]
  135. Petracovschi, Simona, Catalina Costas, and Sorinel Voicu. 2011. Street dance: Form of expressing identity in adolescents and youth. Timisoara Physical Education & Rehabilitation Journal 3: 7–12. [Google Scholar]
  136. Petrone, Robert. 2010. You have to get hit a couple of times: The role of conflict in learning how to “be” a skateboarder. Teaching and Teacher Education 26: 119–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Radicchi, Marcelo Rocha, Lennelle Papertalk, and Sandra Thompson. 2019. It made me feel Brazilian!: Addressing prejudice through Capoeira classes in a school in Western Australia. Health Promotion Journal of Australia: Official Journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals 30: 299–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  138. Rannikko, Anni, Päivi Harinen, Pasi Torvinen, and Veli Liikanen. 2016. The social bordering of lifestyle sports: Inclusive principles, exclusive reality. Journal of Youth Studies 19: 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Rhea, Deborah J., and Scott Martin. 2010. Personality trait differences of traditional sport athletes, bullriders, and other alternative sport athletes. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching 5: 75–86. [Google Scholar]
  140. Rindler, Victoria, Maxime Luiggi, and Jean Griffet. 2022. Fostering unorganized sport to sustain adolescent participation: Empirical evidence from two European countries. Sport, Education and Society 27: 862–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Rynne, Steven. 2016. Exploring the pedagogical possibilities of Indigenous sport-for-development programmes using a socio-personal approach. Sport, Education & Society 21: 605–22. [Google Scholar]
  142. Säfvenbom, Reidar, and Guro Stjernvang. 2020. Lifestyle sport contexts as self-organized epistemic cultures. Sport, Education and Society 25: 829–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Säfvenbom, Reidar, Belinda Wheaton, and Jennifer P. Agans. 2018. ‘How can you enjoy sports if you are under control by others?’ Self-organized lifestyle sports and youth development. Sport in Society 21: 1990–2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Schori, Dominik, Karen Hofmann, and Thomas Abel. 2017. Patterns of sports participation, health risk behaviours, and socio-economic position in young Swiss men. European Journal for Sport and Society 14: 348–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Schram Christensen, Mark, Thor Jensen, Camilla B. Voigt, Jens Bo Nielsen, and Jakob Lorentzen. 2017. To be active through indoor-climbing: An exploratory feasibility study in a group of children with cerebral palsy and typically developing children. BMC Neurology 17: 112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  146. Schwamberger, Benjamin, and Matthew Curtner-Smith. 2017. Influence of a training programme on a preservice teacher’s ability to promote moral and sporting behaviour in sport education. European Physical Education Review 23: 428–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Seifert, Ludovic, Léo Wattebled, Dominic Orth, Maxime L’hermette, Jérémie Boulanger, and Keith Davids. 2016. Skill transfer specificity shapes perception and action under varying environmental constraints. Human Movement Science 48: 132–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  148. Seifert, Ludovic, Leo Wattebled, Maxime L’Hermette, Gautier Bideault, Romain Herault, and Keith Davids. 2013. Skill transfer, affordances and dexterity in different climbing environments. Human Movement Science 32: 1339–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Seifert, Tim, and C. Hedderson. 2010. Intrinsic motivation and flow in skateboarding: An ethnographic study. Journal of Happiness Studies 11: 277–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Shannon, Charlene S., and Tara L. Werner. 2008. The Opening of a Municipal Skate Park: Exploring the Influence on Youth Skateboarders’ Experiences. Journal of Park & Recreation Administration 26: 39–58. [Google Scholar]
  151. Sherk, Vanessa D., Michael G. Bemben, and Debra A. Bemben. 2010. Comparisons of bone mineral density and bone quality in adult rock climbers, resistance-trained men, and untrained men. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 24: 2468–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Siegel, Shannon R., Jacob M. Robinson, Sean A. Johnston, Martin R. Lindley, and Karin A. Pfeiffer. 2015. Health-related Fitness and Energy Expenditure in Recreational Youth Rock Climbers 8–16 Years of Age. International Journal of Exercise Science 8: 174–83. [Google Scholar]
  153. Singer, Christine. 2019. Dancing in Liminal Space: Youth, Waithood, and Transformation in the South African Documentary The African Cypher 2012. Film Criticism 43: 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Sisjord, Mari Kristin. 2009. Fast-girls, babes and the invisible girls. Gender relations in snowboarding. Sport in Society 12: 1299–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Sisjord, Mari Kristin. 2012. Networking among women snowboarders: A study of participants at an international woman snowboard camp. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports 22: 73–84. [Google Scholar]
  156. Siweck, Marcin, Dominika Dudek, Katarzyna Drozdowicz, Rafał Jaeschke, Krzysztof Styczen, Aleksandra Arciszewska, Kareen K. Akiskal, Hagop S. Akiskal, and Janusz K. Rybakowski. 2015. Temperamental dimensions of the TEMPS-A in male and female subjects engaging in extreme or/and high risk sports. Journal of Affective Disorders 170: 66–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  157. Skille, Eivind Åsrum. 2005. Individuality of Cultural Reproduction? Adolescents’ Sport Participation in Norway: Alternative versus Conventional Sports. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 40: 307–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Skille, Eivind Åsrum, and Ivan Waddington. 2006. Alternative sport programmes and social inclusion in Norway. European Physical Education Review 12: 251–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Smits, Froukje. 2019. Young Dutch commercially sponsored kite surfers: Free as a bird? Sport in Society 22: 1707–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Son, Julie S., Susan Houge Mackenzie, Karla Eitel, and Erik Luvaas. 2017. Engaging Youth in Physical Activity and STEM Subjects through Outdoor Adventure Education. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education 20: 32–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Spencer-Cavaliere, Nancy, Bethan C. Kingsley, and John K. Gotwals. 2017. Ethic of care and the competitive ultimate Frisbee playing experiences of young women. Leisure Studies 36: 329–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Spiegel, Jennifer B., and Stephanie N. Parent. 2018. Re-approaching community development through the arts: A ‘critical mixed methods’ study of social circus in Quebec. Community Development Journal 53: 600–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Spiegel, Jennifer Beth, B. Ortiz Choukroun, Arturo Campaña, Katherine M. Boydell, Jaime Breilh, and Annalee Yassi. 2019. Social transformation, collective health and community-based arts: ‘Buen Vivir’ and Ecuador’s social circus programme. Global Public Health 14: 899–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Spiegel, Jennifer Beth, Maria-Christina Breilh, Arturo Campana, Judith Marcuse, and Annalee Yassi. 2015. Social circus and health equity: Exploring the national social circus program in Ecuador. Arts & Health 7: 65–74. [Google Scholar]
  165. Spowart, Lucy. 2019. Snowboarding, motherhood and mobility. Annals of Leisure Research 24: 193–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Stapleton, Scott, and Susan Terrio. 2012. Le Parkour: Urban Street Culture and the Commoditization of Male Youth Expression. International Migration 50: 18–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Steene-Johannessen, Jostein, Bjørge Herman Hansen, Knut Eirik Dalene, Elin Kolle, Kate Northstone, Niels Christian Møller, Anders Grøntved, Niels Wedderkopp, Susi Kriemler, Angie S. Page, and et al. 2020. Variations in accelerometry measured physical activity and sedentary time across Europe–harmonized analyses of 47,497 children and adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 17: 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  168. Stephens, Neil, and Sara Delamont. 2014. I can see it in the nightclub’: Dance, capoeira and male bodies. The Sociological Review 62: 149–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Stevens, Kristen, Richard McGrath, and Emily Ward. 2019. Identifying the influence of leisure-based social circus on the health and well-being of young people in Australia. Annals of Leisure Research 22: 305–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Strittmatter, Anna-Maria, and Eivind Åsrum Skille. 2017. Boosting youth sport? Implementation of Norwegian youth sport policy through the 2016 Lillehammer Winter Youth Olympic Games. Sport in Society 20: 144–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Strittmatter, Anna-Maria, Boris Kilvinger, Annika Bodemar, Eivind Å. Skille, and Markus Kurscheidt. 2018. Dual governance structures in action sports: Institutionalization processes of professional snowboarding revisited. Sport in Society 22: 1655–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Sutherland, Sue, and Sandra Stroot. 2009. Brad’s story: Exploration of an inclusive adventure education experience. Therapeutic Recreation Journal 43: 27–39. [Google Scholar]
  173. Sutherland, Sue, and Sandra Stroot. 2010. The Impact of Participation in an Inclusive Adventure Education Trip on Group Dynamics. Journal of Leisure Research 42: 153–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Taylor, Joe. 2013. Giving kids a break: How surfing has helped young people in Cornwall overcome mental health and social difficulties. Mental Health and Social Inclusion 17: 82–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Theodosiou, Argiris E., K. Mantis, Evridiki Zachopoulou, and Savvas P. Tokmakidis. 2000. Physiological responses during climbing in beginner climbers. Journal of Human Movement Studies 39: 205–16. [Google Scholar]
  176. Thomas, Benjamin R., Michael Lafasakis, and Vicki Spector. 2019. A Child With Autism Spectrum Disorder Teaches Siblings to Skateboard: Effects on Sibling Skills and Family Social Behavior. Child & Family Behavior Therapy 41: 125–40. [Google Scholar]
  177. Thorpe, Holly. 2010. Bourdieu, gender reflexivity, and physical culture: A case of masculinities in the snowboarding field. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 34: 176–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Thorpe, Holly. 2012. ‘Sex, drugs and snowboarding’:(il) legitimate definitions of taste and lifestyle in a physical youth culture. Leisure Studies 31: 33–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Thorpe, Holly. 2016. Look at what we can do with all the broken stuff!’ Youth agency and sporting creativity in sites of war, conflict and disaster. Qualitative Research in Sport Exercise and Health 8: 554–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Thorpe, Holly. 2017. Youth and Alternative Sporting (Im)mobilities in Disrupted and Conflicted Spaces. Transfers-Interdisciplinary Journal of Mobility Studies 7: 56–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Thorpe, Holly, and Nida Ahmad. 2015. Youth, action sports and political agency in the Middle East: Lessons from a grassroots parkour group in Gaza. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 50: 678–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Ugolotti, Nicola De Martini. 2015. Climbing walls, making bridges: Children of immigrants’ identity negotiations through capoeira and parkour in Turin. Leisure Studies 34: 19–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Ugolotti, Nicola De Martini. 2017. ‘We are rolling and vaulting tonight’: Sport programmes, urban regeneration and the politics of parkour in Turin, Italy. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics 9: 25–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Ugolotti, Nicola De Martini, and Eileen Moyer. 2016. ‘If I climb a wall of ten meters’: Capoeira, parkour and the politics of public space among (post)migrant youth in Turin, Italy. Patterns of Prejudice 50: 188–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Van Bottenburg, Maarten, and Lotte Salome. 2010. The indoorisation of outdoor sports: An exploration of the rise of lifestyle sports in artificial settings. Leisure Studies 29: 143–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Van Der Zee, Matthijs D., Denise Van Der Mee, Meike Bartels, and Eco J. C. De Geus. 2019. Tracking of voluntary exercise behaviour over the lifespan. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 16: 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Vazou, Spyridoula, Jacqueline L. Davis, Jennifer Agans, and Tal Jarus. 2015. Bridging the gap between relatedness and physical activity through youth circus participation. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology 37: S15. [Google Scholar]
  188. Waitt, Gordon. 2008. Killing waves’: Surfing, space and gender. Social & Cultural Geography 9: 75–94. [Google Scholar]
  189. Walker, Adam, Myra F. Taylor, Nerina Caltabiano, and Julie Ann Pooley. 2014. Creating friendship networks, establishing a social identity, developing a sense of belonging, meeting new people, and building connections with the community: The social capital support health benefits to be derived from skateboarding in skate-parks. International Journal of Child Health and Human Development 7: 135–46. [Google Scholar]
  190. Watts, Phillip Baxter, and Megan L. Ostrowski. 2014. Oxygen uptake and energy expenditure for children during rock climbing activity. Pediatric Exercise Science 26: 49–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Wheaton, Belinda. 2004. Understanding Lifestyle Sports: Consumption, Identity and Difference. Oxfordshire: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  192. Wheaton, Belinda. 2013. The Cultural Politics of Lifestyle Sports. Oxfordshire: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  193. Wheaton, Belinda, Georgina Roy, and Rebecca Olive. 2017. Exploring critical alternatives for youth development through lifestyle sport: Surfing and community development in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Sustainability 9: 2298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Whittington, Anja, Erica Nixon Mack, Nadine W. Budbill, and Priscilla McKenney. 2011. All-Girls Adventure Programmes: What Are the Benefits? Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 11: 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Wilkes, Matt, Martin J. MacInnis, Lucy A. Hawkes, Heather Massey, Clare Eglin, and Michael J. Tipton. 2018. The physiology of paragliding flight at moderate and extreme altitudes. High Altitude Medicine & Biology 19: 42–51. [Google Scholar]
  196. Willmott, Ashley G. B., Benjamin Sayers, and Gary Brickley. 2020. The physiological and perceptual responses of stand-up paddle board exercise in a laboratory- and field-setting. European Journal of Sport Science 20: 1023–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  197. Wong, Emmy K. L., and Gabriel Y. F. Ng. 2008. Isokinetic work profile of shoulder flexors and extensors in sport climbers and nonclimbers. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy 38: 572–77. [Google Scholar]
  198. World Health Organization. 2020. WHO Guidelines on Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour. Geneva: World Health Organization. [Google Scholar]
  199. Zhong, M. Tay, Wei-Hsiu Lin, Ying H. Kee, and Pui W. Kong. 2019. Trampoline versus resistance training in young adults: Effects on knee muscles strength and balance. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport 90: 452–60. [Google Scholar]
Socsci 12 00299 g001 550
Figure 1. Flow chart of the included articles. Note: some of the publications (n = 3) include both biological/performance outcomes and mental/social/behavioral outcomes and are included in both categories at the final stage in the figure.
Figure 1. Flow chart of the included articles. Note: some of the publications (n = 3) include both biological/performance outcomes and mental/social/behavioral outcomes and are included in both categories at the final stage in the figure.
Socsci 12 00299 g001
Table
Table 1. Biological and performance outcomes categorized by outcome sample, lifestyle sport, study design, kind of outcome, and study participants.
Table 1. Biological and performance outcomes categorized by outcome sample, lifestyle sport, study design, kind of outcome, and study participants.
Outcome Category Outcome SampleLifestyle Sport Study DesignBeneficial Association (Number of Articles) Mixed Results 1 (Number of Articles)No Association (Number of Articles)Participants within Category
Biological benefits
(unique studies = 48)
Body composition/body weightClimbing RCT
Experiment 2
Cross-sectional		2
1
1		 
1
 
Trampolining Experiment 2 1
Surfing Case report
Experiment 2 		 
1		 1Autism spectrum disorder: 1
Motor skills 3 CapoeiraExperiment 2 1 Hearing disabilities: 1
Circus artsExperiment 2 1
Climbing RCT
Experiment 2 		2
1 		 
1		 Cerebral palsy: 2
Inline SkatingRCT1
Mixed activities Experiment 2 1
ParkourCross-sectional 1
SnowboardingExperiment 2 1
Trampolining RCT
Experiment 2		4
1		 Intellectual disability: 1
Cardiorespiratory fitnessClimbing RCT 1
Surfing Experiment 2 2 Disabilities:1
Muscle strength/endurance Climbing/bouldering RCT
Experiment 2
Cross-sectional 		1
2
2		1
2		 
1		Cerebral palsy: 1
Parkour Cross-sectional 1
Surfing Experiment 2:
Case-report 		1
1		1 Disabilities: 2
Autism spectrum disorder: 1
TrampoliningRCT1
Flexibility ClimbingRCT
Experiment 2 		2
 		 
1		 
1
Surfing Experiment 2
Case-report 		 
1		1 Disabilities: 1
Autism spectrum disorder: 1
TrampoliningRCT
Experiment 2 		1
1
Metabolic cost/training intensity 4 CapoeiraCross-sectional1
ClimbingCross-sectional 6 Autism spectrum disorder: 1
ParaglidingCross-sectional 1
ScooteringCross-sectional 1
Skate-/long-boarding Cross-sectional 2
SUPCross-sectional1
Surfing Cross-sectional
Case-report		3
1		 Autism spectrum disorder: 1
Trampolining Cross-sectional 1
Ultimate FrisbeeCross-sectional 1
Systolic/diastolic BPSurfingExperiment 2 1
Inflammation Circus artsExperiment 2 1 Overweight/obese children: 1
Bone mass/bone mineral densityClimbingCross-sectional 1
Medical conditionsClimbingRCT 1Cerebral palsy
TrampoliningRCT
Cross-sectional 		1 
1		 Cystic fibrosis: 2
Performance
(unique studies = 7)
Skills in other sportsClimbingCross-sectional 2
SkateboardingExperiment 2 1
Sport-specific skillsClimbing Experiment 2
Cross-sectional 		2
1		 Cerebral palsy: 1
SurfingCross-sectional 1
Note. 1 Mixed results: reported beneficial associations for some of the outcome measures, but not for others. 2 Experiment with no randomization or no control group. 3 Motor skills include basic locomotor motor skills, mostly jumping length/height and balance. 4 Metabolic cost/intensity at least at moderate intensity while performing the sport; moderate intensity consistent with physical activity recommendations. BP = blood pressure; RCT = randomized control trial; SUP = stand-up paddleboard.
Table
Table 2. References on biological and performance outcomes included in the study.
Table 2. References on biological and performance outcomes included in the study.
Outcome Category Outcome SampleLifestyle Sport Beneficial Association (References) Mixed Results (References)No Association (References)
Biological benefits
Body composition/body weightClimbing (Aras and Akalan 2016; Aykora 2019; Balas et al. 2009; Sherk et al. 2010; Siegel et al. 2015)(Siegel et al. 2015)
Trampolining (Aalizadeh et al. 2016)
Surfing (Clapham et al. 2020) (Clapham et al. 2018)
Motor skills Capoeira (Lima 2017)
Circus arts(Kriellaars et al. 2019)
Climbing (Aykora 2019; Böhm et al. 2015; Gallotta et al. 2015)(Schram Christensen et al. 2017)
Inline skating(Muehlbauer et al. 2013)
Mixed activities (De Araujo et al. 2012)
Parkour(Grospretre and Lepers 2016)
Snowboarding (Klos et al. 2019)
Trampolining (Arabatzi 2018; Atiković et al. 2018; Giagazoglou et al. 2013; Zhong et al. 2019; Aalizadeh et al. 2016)
Cardiorespiratory fitnessClimbing (Aras and Akalan 2016)
Surfing (Clapham et al. 2020; Hignett et al. 2018)
Muscle strength/endurance Climbing/bouldering (Balas et al. 2009; Fryer et al. 2017; Lirgg et al. 2006; Muehlbauer et al. 2012; Wong and Ng 2008)(Aras and Akalan 2016; Gallotta et al. 2015; Schram Christensen et al. 2017)(Siegel et al. 2015)
Parkour (Grospretre et al. 2018)
Surfing (Clapham et al. 2018, 2020)(Armitano et al. 2015)
Trampolining(Zhong et al. 2019)
Flexibility Climbing(Aykora 2019; Muehlbauer et al. 2012)(Siegel et al. 2015)(Gallotta et al. 2015)
Surfing (Clapham et al. 2018)(Armitano et al. 2015)
Trampolining(Giagazoglou et al. 2013; Koca et al. 2019)
Metabolic cost/training intensity Capoeira(Moreira et al. 2018)
Climbing(Fencl et al. 2011; Oriel et al. 2018; PanáČková et al. 2014; Siegel et al. 2015; Theodosiou et al. 2000; Watts and Ostrowski 2014)
Paragliding (Wilkes et al. 2018)
Scootering(Kijima et al. 2007)
Skate-/longboarding (Board and Browning 2014; Hetzler et al. 2011)
SUP(Willmott et al. 2020)
Surfing (Barlow et al. 2014; Bravo et al. 2016; Clapham et al. 2018; LaLanne et al. 2017)
Trampolining (Budzynski-Seymour et al. 2019)
Ultimate Frisbee(Madueno et al. 2017)
Systolic/diastolic BPSurfing (Hignett et al. 2018)
Inflammation Circus arts(Momesso dos Santos et al. 2015)
Bone mass/Bone mineral densityClimbing (Sherk et al. 2010)
Medical conditionsClimbing (Böhm et al. 2015)
Trampolining(Kriemler et al. 2016)(Currant and Mahony 2008)
Performance
Skills in other sportsClimbing(Seifert et al. 2013; Seifert et al. 2016)
Skateboarding(Kunzell and Lukas 2011)
Sport-specific skillsClimbing (Blasing et al. 2014; Espana-Romero et al. 2012; Schram Christensen et al. 2017)
Surfing(Barlow et al. 2014)
Table
Table 3. Mental, social, and behavioral outcomes categorized by outcome sample, lifestyle sport, study design, type of association, and study participants.
Table 3. Mental, social, and behavioral outcomes categorized by outcome sample, lifestyle sport, study design, type of association, and study participants.
Outcome Category Outcome Sample (Examples) Lifestyle Sports Sample (Examples)Study DesignBeneficial Associations (Number of Articles) Negative Associations (Number of Articles)Neutral Association/No Outcome (Number of Articles) Participants within Category
Mental outcomes
(unique studies = 13) 		Joy, freedom, euphoria efficacy, satisfaction,
confidence, perception of self, motivation,
self-efficacy, emotion,
well-being		Climbing, caving, circus arts, surfing, sailing,
street dance, trampolining,
surfing		Qualitative study5 1Children and adolescent psychiatric inpatients, young people participating in lifestyle sports
Experiment5 (School) children, young people; autism spectrum disorder
Cross-sectional1 Young people participating in lifestyle sports
RCT 2Children with special needs
Social outcomes (unique studies = 12)Gender equality, network building, social capital, social inclusion, democratic values, teamwork, health equity, social esteem, interaction with other young people, friendship, sport skillsCircus arts, snowboarding, parkour, urban football, skateboardingQualitative study 92 Marginalized youths; children and young people participating in lifestyle sports
Cross-sectional 1 Young people
Mixed methods 1 Street-involved youths
Behavioral outcomes
(unique studies = 13)		Identity (construction), creativity, expressions of masculinity/femininity, taking risks, sporting behavior/sport participation, use of alcohol, environmental consciousnessSurfing, rock climbing, Ultimate Frisbee, parkour, street dance, capoeira, danceQualitative521Children and young people participating in lifestyle sports
Cross-sectional211Children and young people; young people participating in lifestyle sports
Experiment2 1Adolescents with autism spectrum disorder; at-risk adolescents
Mental/behavioral
(unique studies = 14) 		Hyperthymic temperament; self-regulation, learning of skills, attention, hedonic balance, and life satisfaction; mix of above examplesStreet dance, trampolining, surfing, extreme sports, trolley surfing, capoeira, skateboarding, snowboardingQualitative study6 1Children associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; young people; young people living and learning in a risk society
Experiment4 Young people with mental health needs who are experiencing social exclusion; minority schoolchildren (predominantly Black and economically disadvantaged); at-risk youth
RCT1 Young adults with anxiety disorders
Multiple-baseline across skills design1 A family of three children: 11-year-old boy with autism spectrum disorder and his two siblings
Case-control 1Young people engaging in extreme or/and high-risk sports, and age- and sex-matched control group
Mental/social
(Unique studies = 10)		Freedom, identity, disciplinary power, spatial limitations; mix of above examplesKitesurfing, rock climbing, circus arts, freeriding, skateboarding, skiingQualitative study821Youth in Gaza, Indigenous youth, children and young people participating in lifestyle sports, young people
Cross-sectional2 1Youth with disabilities; young people participating in lifestyle sports
Social/behavioral (unique studies = 37)Autonomy, community, gender equality, social class equality, interpersonal skills, youth engagement, trust, gender identity, social hierarchy, social inclusion and exclusion; mix of above examplesMartial arts, mountain biking, longboarding, tricking, wakeboarding, windsurfing, roller derby, skateboarding, snowboarding, snowshoeingQualitative study2346Young people participating in lifestyle sports, children of immigrants’ identity, marginalized youth, children and their families from socially disadvantaged areas, parents of children with disabilities
Cross-sectional3 2Young people
Experiment3 Refugees, students
Mixed methods511Young people, marginalized youth, young people participating in lifestyle sports
Mental/Social/behavioral
(unique studies = 25)		Mix of the above; reduced trauma, achieving goals, empathy towards new culture, mental well-beingDance, kayaking, paddle boarding, sailing, unicycling, quidditch, capoeira, rock climbing, skateboarding, parkour, circus artsQualitative study16 Children and adults requiring physical, cognitive, and/or psychosocial supports; at-risk disengaged youth; Indigenous youth in Australia; young people living with physical disabilities; young males diagnosed with high-function autism; youth in sites of war, conflict, and disaster; young people participating in lifestyle sports
Cross-sectional1 Young people participating in lifestyle sports
Experiment4 Schoolchildren, young people facing mental health issues or social exclusion; refugees
Mixed methods3 Children who experienced abuse with families
Quasi-experiment1 Young people
Note. Beneficial, negative, and neutral outcomes can occur in the same study.
Table
Table 4. References on mental, social, and behavioral outcomes included in the study.
Table 4. References on mental, social, and behavioral outcomes included in the study.
Outcome Category Outcome Sample (Examples) Lifestyle Sports Sample (Examples)Beneficial Associations (References) Negative Associations (References)Neutral Association/No Outcome (References)
Mental outcomes
(unique studies = 13) 		Joy, freedom, euphoria efficacy, satisfaction,
confidence, perception of self, motivation,
self-efficacy, emotion,
well-being, addiction withdrawal symptoms		Climbing, caving, circus arts, surfing, sailing,
street dance, trampolining, surfing		(Agans et al. 2014; Carlman and Hjalmarsson 2019; Cavanaugh and Rademacher 2014; Ceciliani et al. 2008; Clapham et al. 2018; Eckstein and Rüth 2015; Fletcher and Prince 2017; Heirene et al. 2016; Kriellaars et al. 2019; Motl et al. 2000; Seifert and Hedderson 2010) (Heirene et al. 2016; Mazzoni et al. 2006, 2009)
Social outcomes (unique studies = 12)Gender equality, network building, social capital, social inclusion, democratic values, teamwork, health equity, social esteem, interaction with other young people, friendship, sport skillsCircus arts, snowboarding, parkour, urban football, skateboarding(Atencio et al. 2019; Spencer-Cavaliere et al. 2017; Geertman et al. 2016; Heller and Taglialatela 2018; King and Church 2015; L’Aoustet and Griffet 2001; Leather and Nicholls 2016; Müller and Mutz 2019; Sisjord 2012; Skille 2005; Spiegel et al. 2015)(Anderson 2001; King and Church 2015)
Behavioral outcomes
(unique studies = 13)		Identity (construction), creativity, expressions of masculinity/femininity, taking risks, sporting behavior/sport participation, use of alcohol, attitude towards environmentSurfing, rock climbing, Ultimate Frisbee, parkour, street dance, capoeira, dance(Bowers et al. 2014; Cheng and Tsaur 2012; Cross 2002; Gieseler and Sheppard 2019; Holland-Smith et al. 2013; Moore and Werch 2005; Schwamberger and Curtner-Smith 2017; Säfvenbom and Stjernvang 2020; Oriel et al. 2018; Waitt 2008)(Halldorsson et al. 2014; Moore and Werch 2005; Waitt 2008)(Kern et al. 2014; Schwamberger and Curtner-Smith 2017; Stapleton and Terrio 2012)
Mental/behavioral
(unique studies = 14) 		Hyperthymic temperament, self-regulation, learning of skills, attention, hedonic balance and life satisfaction; mix of above examplesStreet dance, trampolining, surfing, extreme sports, trolleysurfing, Capoeira, skateboarding, snowboarding(Arvidsen et al. 2020; Kutty et al. 2017; Lau et al. 2016; Levin 2016, 2018; Marshall et al. 2019; McCulloch et al. 2010; McGuire and Harrison 2008; Morrissey 2008; Mutz et al. 2019; Taylor 2013; Thomas et al. 2019)(Siweck et al. 2015)(Spowart 2019)
Mental/social
(Unique studies = 10)		Freedom, identity, disciplinary power, spatial limitations; sexism; increased well-being, peers and social support; mix of above examplesKitesurfing, rock climbing, circus, freeriding, skateboarding, skiing, rock climbing(Beal 2001; Ennis and Tonkin 2018; Frumberg et al. 2019; Frühauf et al. 2020; Rynne 2016; Smits 2019; Thorpe and Ahmad 2015; Thorpe 2016; Vazou et al. 2015; Whittington et al. 2011)(Beal 2001; Smits 2019)(Frumberg et al. 2019; Frühauf et al. 2020)
Social/behavioral (unique studies = 37)Autonomy, community, gender equality, social class equality, interpersonal skills, youth engagement, trust, gender identity, social hierarchy, social inclusion and exclusion; mix of above examplesMartial arts, mountain biking, longboarding, tricking, wakeboarding, windsurfing, roller derby, skateboarding, snowboarding, snowshoeing(Atencio et al. 2013; Backstrom 2013; Bradley 2010; Dupont 2014; Evin et al. 2014; Gilchrist and Wheaton 2011; Harper and Webster 2017; Hollett 2019; Hortiguela et al. 2017; Jones 2011; Kelly et al. 2005; Kidder 2013; King and Church 2020; Light and Nash 2006; Mom et al. 2019; Moore et al. 2017; Morgan 2010; Petracovschi et al. 2011; Petrone 2010; Rannikko et al. 2016; Schori et al. 2017; Shannon and Werner 2008; Skille and Waddington 2006; Singer 2019; Spiegel and Parent 2018; Son et al. 2017; Sutherland and Stroot 2009; Säfvenbom et al. 2018; Ugolotti 2015, 2017; Ugolotti and Moyer 2016; Walker et al. 2014)(Backstrom 2013; Beal and Wheaton 2003; Dupont 2014; Edensor and Richards 2007; Sisjord 2009; Skille and Waddington 2006)(Atencio et al. 2013; Beal and Wheaton 2003; Edensor and Richards 2007; Kidder 2013; Rannikko et al. 2016; Rhea and Martin 2010; Schori et al. 2017; Sisjord 2009; Thorpe 2010)
Mental/social/behavioral
(unique studies = 25)		Mix of the above; reduced trauma, achieving goals, empathy towards new culture, mental well-beingDance, kayaking, paddle boarding, sailing, unicycling, quidditch, capoeira, rock climbing, skateboarding, parkour, circus arts(Ashworth 2017; Backstrom and Sand 2019; Bernadowski 2017; Bignold 2013; Cohen and Peachey 2015; Cotterill and Brown 2018; Dumas and Laforest 2009; Fernández-Río and Suarez 2016; Godfrey et al. 2015; Henstock et al. 2013; Hignett et al. 2018; Lai et al. 2020; Loiselle et al. 2019; Méndez-Alonso et al. 2015; Merrick et al. 2020; Momartin et al. 2018; Norton et al. 2019; Petracovschi 2012; Radicchi et al. 2019; Stephens and Delamont 2014; Spiegel et al. 2019; Stevens et al. 2019; Sutherland and Stroot 2010; Thorpe 2017; Wheaton et al. 2017)
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Säfvenbom, R.; Strittmatter, A.-M.; Bernhardsen, G.P. Developmental Outcomes for Young People Participating in Informal and Lifestyle Sports: A Scoping Review of the Literature, 2000–2020. Soc. Sci. 2023, 12, 299. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12050299

AMA Style

Säfvenbom R, Strittmatter A-M, Bernhardsen GP. Developmental Outcomes for Young People Participating in Informal and Lifestyle Sports: A Scoping Review of the Literature, 2000–2020. Social Sciences. 2023; 12(5):299. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12050299

Chicago/Turabian Style

Säfvenbom, Reidar, Anna-Maria Strittmatter, and Guro Pauck Bernhardsen. 2023. "Developmental Outcomes for Young People Participating in Informal and Lifestyle Sports: A Scoping Review of the Literature, 2000–2020" Social Sciences 12, no. 5: 299. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12050299

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop