The development of the physical fitness construct across childhood

Abstract

The measurement of physical fitness (PF) is an important factor from many different perspectives. PF is a determinant of healthy child development as it is related to several health outcomes. However, existing taxonomies of the construct and frequently used fitness assessments vary concerning their theoretical assumptions and practical implications. From a theoretical perspective, the construct of physical fitness covers a variety of motor domains, such as cardiovascular endurance, strength, coordination, or flexibility (eg, Caspersen et al., 1985). However, most fitness assessments provide a single (composite) score including all items as test outcome. This implicitly relates to a one-dimensional structure of physical fitness, which has been shown for other motor performance assessments in early childhood (eg, Utesch et al., 2016).This study investigated this one-dimensional structure for 6-to 9-year-old children within the item response theory framework (Partial Credit Model). Seven fitness subtests covering a variety of motor dimensions (6-minute run, pushups, sit-ups, standing broad jump, 20 m sprint, jumping sideways, and balancing backwards) were conducted to a total of 790 six-year-olds, 1371 seven-year-olds, 1331 eightyear-olds, and 925 nine-year-olds (48.2% females). Each item was transformed into five performance categories controlling for sex and age. This study indicates that a one-dimensional testing of PF is feasible across middle childhood. Furthermore, for 6-and 7-year-olds, all seven items including balancing backwards can be accumulated to one factor. From the age of about 8 and 9 years balancing backwards seems to become too easy. Altogether, analyses show no diversification of PF across childhood. K E Y W O R D Sitem response theory,

Investigating the construct of motor competence in middle childhood using the BOT‐2 Short Form: An item response theory perspective

“…For instance, Utesch et al found a one‐dimensional construct in children aged 9‐11 years using the German Motor Ability Test 6‐18, which consists of eight items (Deutscher Motorik‐Test 6‐18, DMT). Another study of Utesch et al showed a single latent trait in children aged 6‐9 years, using the same test battery. In contrast to the aforementioned studies, the present research used a large item set (ie, 14 items) in order to evaluate the general motor ability hypothesis more adequately.…”

Long‐term effect of migration background on the development of physical fitness among primary school children

“…According to the work by Utesch et al, we understand the term physical fitness as a motor competence presuming a one‐dimensional structure, which is defined as the ability to successfully complete a number of wide‐ranging motor skills. Physical fitness was tested using the German motor performance test DMT 6‐18, a standardized test battery consisting of eight items testing different subdomains of physical fitness: 20‐m sprint (sprint velocity), balancing backwards on three 3‐m‐long beams with different width (coordination in a task requiring precision), jumping sideward over a middle line for 15 seconds (coordination under time pressure), stand‐and‐reach (flexibility), push‐ups in a period of 40 seconds (strength endurance), sit ups in a period of 40 seconds (strength endurance), standing long jump (power), and 6‐minute run (endurance).…”

“…As Kaiser‐Jovy et al did not find a significant influence of hours of media use on sport activity, they concluded that a heavy media use is part of a complex juvenile leisure behavior and therefore rather a “time killer” with regard to sport activity and physical fitness. In general, physical fitness is subdivided into health‐related fitness (cardiorespiratory endurance, muscular endurance and strength, body composition, flexibility) and skill‐related fitness components (agility, balance, coordination, speed, power, reaction time) which can be tested by a single test item assessment (eg, “shuttle run” covering cardiovascular endurance) or by entire motor test batteries . There is evidence that a decrease in physical fitness is associated with an increase in body mass index among children and adolescents .…”

“…In general, physical fitness is subdivided into health‐related fitness (cardiorespiratory endurance, muscular endurance and strength, body composition, flexibility) and skill‐related fitness components (agility, balance, coordination, speed, power, reaction time) which can be tested by a single test item assessment (eg, “shuttle run” covering cardiovascular endurance) or by entire motor test batteries . There is evidence that a decrease in physical fitness is associated with an increase in body mass index among children and adolescents . In addition, excessive weight, physical inactivity, and a lack of fitness in young ages are associated with increasing prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors, orthopedic problems, and psychosocial constraints leading to a reduced life expectancy of overweight people by several years .…”

“…6 There is evidence that a decrease in physical fitness is associated with an increase in body mass index among children and adolescents. 6,7 In addition, excessive weight, physical inactivity, and a lack of fitness in young ages are associated with increasing prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors, orthopedic problems, and psychosocial constraints 9,10 leading to a reduced life expectancy of overweight people by several years. 12 Therefore, an early prevention of excess weight gain, low physical activity, and low physical fitness in young ages, for example during preschool or primary school, seems of utmost importance as physical activity is favorably associated with physical, psychological/social, and cognitive health indicators of children 5-17 years old.…”