# Investigation on Health Promotion by the Typical Sports for Teenagers with Self-Efficacy and Sports Commitment Questionnaires

Authors: Qiaoyin Tan; Weide Shao
Journal: Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
 (2021)

---

## Abstract

This work studied the health promotion by the typical sports using self-efficacy and sports commitment questionnaires for 804 teenagers, who were from different interest-oriented sport classes. Five typical interest-oriented sport classes were selected due to the difference in sport characteristics: basketball, swimming, tennis, taekwondo, and archery. Statistical analyses, ANOVA analysis, and multiple comparisons (with least significant difference, LSD) were applied to the collected data. It has been found that boys and girls have similar self-efficacy of adolescent sports health. Adolescents’ self-efficacy of sports health has significant differences among different sports items, where the basketball group scored the highest. Adolescents in the professional level have the highest self-efficacy of sports health, whereas the skillful level and beginner level have no significant difference. The male students are more enthusiastic and fond of sports than female students. There are significant differences between sports commitment and sports health of adolescents in different sports, where the basketball group scored the highest. Exercise induces higher score of sports commitment; however, no significant difference is observed for the skillful level and the beginner level. The significant positive correlation is found between sports health and self-efficacy and sports commitment, self-efficacy, and sports commitment. Besides, the role of self-efficacy is partial intermediary between sports health and sports commitment.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Choosing an active lifestyle is the priority trend of health. A large number of studies have shown that, besides the prevention of diseases and the treatment after discovery [1], physical exercise is an effective means to promote health [2, 3]. Adult-based research shows that there is a developmental positive correlation between sports level and physical health [4–6]. Among teenagers, periodic sports also have a positive impact on health [7]. Improving the level of physical activity is one of the main intervention strategies to improve adolescent health [8].There are several longitudinal studies on the health promotion of teenagers in sports clubs. These studies show that promoting the positive development of teenagers through sports is the future direction of health promotion [9]. Sports clubs are an ideal environment for children and adolescents to promote health [10]. Some studies have found that the establishment of healthy sports clubs is a conceptual mapping method to effectively improve the quality of life [11]. Some government-led health and welfare programs promote the health of club members significantly [12].As far as we know, China has not studied the relationship between various typical sports and health status of teenagers, and the current research aims to fill this gap. Based on the sport characteristics, we choose five typical sports as the studying objects, including basketball, swimming, tennis, taekwondo, and archery. Skill-oriented sports include basketball in the same field [13], tennis across the net [14], taekwondo in fighting [15], and archery in performance accuracy [16]. Swimming is chosen by the class dominated by physical ability [17]. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the relationship between typical exercise and health promotion. To investigate teenagers’ sports-related behaviors in clubs, the work is carried out to find out the details of their self-efficacy and action feelings and to analyze their promotion effect on health behaviors. Math tools have been widely used in the analysis of healthcare data, including statistical analysis [18–21], computer techniques (i.e., molecular docking) [22, 23], and artificial intelligence [24]. In this work, math tools have been used for the comprehensive healthcare analysis.


## 2. Methods

### 2.1. Object

Table1 shows the basic statistics of the investigation. 804 teenagers from different interest-oriented sport classes were online investigated using the questionnaire (in the supplementary file). Five typical interest-oriented sport classes were selected due to the difference in sport characteristics: basketball, swimming, tennis, taekwondo, and archery. The levels of professional, skillful, and beginner are determined according to the questionnaire results with subjective answers. Self-efficacy and sports commitment questionnaires [25] were filled by the object. ANOVA analysis [26] was applied to the collected data.Table 1
Basic statistics of the investigation.
NameClassificationFrequencyPercentage (%)GenderMale46457.7Female34042.3SportsBasketball15118.8Swimming11914.8Tennis14818.4Taekwondo25331.5Archery13316.5Sports gradeProfessional14317.8Skillful22528Beginner43654.2


## 2.1. Object

Table1 shows the basic statistics of the investigation. 804 teenagers from different interest-oriented sport classes were online investigated using the questionnaire (in the supplementary file). Five typical interest-oriented sport classes were selected due to the difference in sport characteristics: basketball, swimming, tennis, taekwondo, and archery. The levels of professional, skillful, and beginner are determined according to the questionnaire results with subjective answers. Self-efficacy and sports commitment questionnaires [25] were filled by the object. ANOVA analysis [26] was applied to the collected data.Table 1
Basic statistics of the investigation.
NameClassificationFrequencyPercentage (%)GenderMale46457.7Female34042.3SportsBasketball15118.8Swimming11914.8Tennis14818.4Taekwondo25331.5Archery13316.5Sports gradeProfessional14317.8Skillful22528Beginner43654.2


## 3. Results and Discussion

### 3.1. Analysis on the Current Situation of Self-Efficacy in Sports Health

Table2 shows the comparison of the difference of self-efficacy in sports health between different genders (independent sample t-test). Table 3 shows the self-efficacy analysis for different genders. The results of the independent sample t-test on the self-efficacy of sports health of teenagers of different genders showed that the statistical quantity t = −0.313 and the significance level P = 0.632 > 0.05, indicating that there is no significant difference between boys and girls in the self-efficacy of adolescent sports health; that is, both boys and girls have similar self-efficacy. In addition, it can be seen from the description table that there are 464 boys among 804 teenagers participating in the questionnaire. 340 female students and their self-efficacy scores averaged 3.95 and 3.98, respectively, which were basically the same.Table 2
Comparison of the difference of self-efficacy in sports health between different genders (independent sample t-test).
Levene’s test for the equation of varianceThe t-test for the mean value equationFSig.tdfSig. (bilateral)MDSD95% confidence intervalLowerUpperSelf-efficacyAssuming the variance is equal19.5830.000−0.4658020.642−0.023110.04973−0.120740.07451Assuming the variance is not equal−0.478790.3560.632−0.023110.04831−0.117950.07172Table 3
Self-efficacy analysis for different genders.
Self-efficacyNM±SDtPMale4643.95 ± 0.75−0.4780.632Female3403.98 ± 0.34Table4 shows the comparison of Self-efficacy of adolescents in different sports (one-way ANOVA analysis). Table 5 shows the self-efficacy analysis for different sports. One-way ANOVA results for self-efficacy of sports health of adolescents in different sports items showed that statistical F = 3.321 and significance level P = 0.010 < 0.05, indicating that, at the significance level of 5%, adolescents’ self-efficacy of sports health has significant differences among different sports items. It can be seen from the description table that, among the 804 teenagers who participated in the questionnaire, 253 are from taekwondo, and the average self-efficacy score of this project is 3.96. The least is swimming teenagers, with 119 teenagers, and the average score is 3.89. Among them, basketball sport has the highest average score, with the average score of 4.14.Table 4
Comparison of self-efficacy of adolescents in different sports (one-way ANOVA analysis).
Quadratic sumdfMean squareFSig.Interblock6.36841.5923.3210.010Within the group382.9817990.479Total389.349803Table 5
Self-efficacy analysis for different sports.
Self-efficacyNM±SDFPBasketball1514.14 ± 0.693.321≤0.001Swimming1193.89 ± 0.64Tennis1483.88 ± 0.70Taekwondo2533.96 ± 0.74Archery1333.94 ± 0.70Table6 shows the multiple comparisons (with least significant difference, LSD) to see the differences between the various sports. The results in the table show that the P values of significance between basketball and swimming, tennis, taekwondo, and archery are 0.003, 0.001, 0.012, and 0.017, respectively, all less than 0.05, indicating that there are significant differences in the sense of self-efficacy of the youth’s sports health between basketball and swimming, basketball and tennis, basketball and taekwondo, and basketball and archery.Table 6
Multiple comparisons (with least significant difference, LSD) to see the differences between the various sports.
(I) sports(J) sportsMD (I-J)SEPBasketballSwimming0.24903∗0.084870.003Tennis0.25805∗0.08008≤0.001Taekwondo0.17938∗0.071200.012Archery0.19758∗0.082330.017Table7 shows the comparison of self-efficacy of adolescents with different sports levels in sports health with ANOVA. Table 8 shows the self-efficacy analysis for different exercise levels. One-way ANOVA was carried out on the self-efficacy of sports health of adolescents at different sports levels. The results showed that the statistical quantity F = 31.045, and the significance level P<0.05, indicating that the self-efficacy of sports health of adolescents at the significance level of 5% was significantly different among different sports levels. It also can be seen from the description table that, among the 804 teenagers who participated in the questionnaire, 436 of them are in the stage of beginners, with an average of 3.89, 143 of them are in the professional level, and 225 of them are in the skillful level, with an average of 4.36 and 3.85, respectively. From the mean value, it can be seen that adolescents in the professional level have the highest self-efficacy of sports health. Subsequently, we used multiple comparisons (with least significant difference, LSD) to look at the differences between the exercise levels.Table 7
Comparison of self-efficacy of adolescents with different sports levels in sports health with ANOVA.
Quadratic sumdfMean squareFSig.Interblock28.009214.00531.0450.000Within the group361.3408010.451Total389.349803Table 8
Self-efficacy analysis for different exercise levels.
Self-efficacyNM±SDFPProfessional1434.36 ± 0.6231.045≤0.001Skillful2253.85 ± 0.72Beginner4363.89 ± 0.70Table9 shows the multiple comparisons (LSD) for differences in exercise levels. The results of multiple comparisons showed that the significance level P values between the professional level and the skillful level, the professional level, and the beginner level are all ≤0.001, which is less than 0.05, indicating that there are significant differences in self-efficacy between the professional level and the skillful level and between the professional level and the beginner level. The significance level between the skillful level and the beginner level is P = 0.408 > 0.05. The results showed that there was no significant difference between the skillful level and the beginner level in the self-efficacy of adolescents’ sports health.Table 9
Multiple comparisons (LSD) for differences in exercise levels.
(I) sports grade(J) sports gradeMD (I-J)SDPProfessionalSkillful0.51549∗0.07183≤0.001Beginner0.46988∗0.06472≤0.001SkillfulProfessional−0.51549∗0.07183≤0.001Beginner−0.045610.055130.408BeginnerProfessional−0.46988∗0.06472≤0.001Skillful0.045610.055130.408


### 3.2. Analysis on the Current Situation of Exercise Commitment of Adolescent Sports Health

Table10 shows the comparison of the differences of exercise commitment in sports health among adolescents of different genders (independent sample t-test). Table 11 shows the sports commitment for different genders. The results of the independent sample t-test on exercise health and exercise commitment of adolescents of different genders showed that the statistical quantity t = 1.959 and the significance level P = 0.044 < 0.05, indicating that, at the significance level of 5%, there is a significant difference between boys’ and girls’ sports commitment in adolescent sports health. In addition, it can be seen from the description table that the mean value of 464 boys’ sports commitment among 804 teenagers participating in the questionnaire is 4.11. The average of 340 female students’ sports commitment was 4.01, and the score of male students’ sports commitment was significantly higher than that of female students, indicating that male students are more enthusiastic and fond of sports than female students.Table 10
Comparison of the differences of exercise commitment in sports health among adolescents of different genders (independent sample t-test).
Levene’s test for the equation of varianceThe t-test for the mean value equationFSig.tdfSig. (bilateral)MDSD95% confidence intervalLowerUpperSports commitmentAssuming the variance is equal14.3590.0001.9158020.0560.099160.05177−0.002460.20078Assuming the variance is not equal1.959780.6470.0440.099160.05062−0.000210.19852Table 11
Sports commitment for different genders.
Sports commitmentNM ± SDtPMale4644.11 ± 0.771.9590.044Female3404.01 ± 0.66Table12 shows the comparison of differences in exercise commitment of adolescents in different sports using ANOVA. Table 13 shows the sports commitment for different sport types. One-way ANOVA analysis of sports commitment for sports health of adolescents in different sports shows that F = 2.812 and significance level P = 0.025 < 0.05, indicating that there are significant differences between sports commitment and sports health of adolescents in different sports at the significance level of 5%. From the description table, it can be seen that, among the 804 teenagers who participated in the questionnaire, the highest mean value is that of 151 teenagers who participated in basketball sports, reaching 4.21, followed by swimming and taekwondo, both of which are 4.06, and the lowest is that of archery, only 3.99. Subsequently, we used multiple comparisons (LSD) to look at the differences of exercise commitment among different sports.Table 12
Comparison of differences in exercise commitment of adolescents in different sports using ANOVA.
Quadratic sumdfMean squareFSig.Interblock7.15441.7892.8120.025Within the group508.1447990.636Total515.298803Table 13
Sports commitment for different sport types.
Sports commitmentNM ± SDFPBasketball1514.21 ± 0.712.8120.025Swimming1194.06 ± 0.63Tennis1484.01 ± 0.72Taekwondo2534.06 ± 0.75Archery1333.99 ± 0.78Table14 shows the multiple comparisons (LSD) for differences in sports commitment among different sports. Multiple comparison results showed that the P values of significance level between basketball and tennis, taekwondo, and archery were 0.013, 0.034, and 0.011, respectively, which were all less than 0.05, indicating that, at the significance level of 5%, there were significant differences in the self-efficacy of adolescent sports health between basketball and tennis, basketball and taekwondo, and basketball and archery. There was no significant difference between basketball and swimming, P = 0.076 > 0.05.Table 14
Multiple comparisons (LSD) for differences in sports commitment among different sports.
(I) sports(J) sportsMD (I-J)SDPBasketballSwimming0.157990.088780.076Tennis0.20826∗0.083780.013Taekwondo0.15792∗0.074480.034Archery0.21958∗0.086130.011Table15 shows the comparison of differences in sports commitment among adolescents with different sports levels in sports health using ANOVA. Table 16 shows the sports commitment for different sports levels. One-way ANOVA was conducted for sports commitment of adolescents with different sports levels. The results showed that F = 21.747 and significance level P<0.05, indicating that, at the significance level of 5%, there was a significant difference in sports commitment of adolescents with different sports levels. It also can be seen from the description table that, among the 804 teenagers who participated in the questionnaire, 436 of them are in the stage of beginner, with an average value of 3.97. The average value of sports commitment of 143 teenagers in the professional level is the highest, reaching 4.42. The average value of the last 225 teenagers in the skillful level is 4.02. From the mean value, it can be seen that the sports health commitment of adolescents in the professional level is the highest, followed by skillful level, and the lowest among those beginners. This indicates that exercise induces higher score of sports commitment. Subsequently, we used multiple comparisons (LSD) to look at the differences between the sports levels.Table 15
Comparison of differences in sports commitment among adolescents with different sports levels in sports health using ANOVA.
Quadratic sumdfMean squareFSig.Interblock21.821210.91121.7470.000Within the group401.8768010.502Total423.698803Table 16
Sports commitment for different sports levels.
Sports commitmentNM ± SDFPProfessional1434.42 ± 0.6321.747≤0.001Skillful2254.02 ± 0.73Beginner4363.98 ± 0.72Table17 shows the multiple comparisons (LSD) for different the sports levels. The results of the abovementioned multiple comparisons show that the significance P values between professional and skillful and between professional and beginner level are all ≤0.001, which is less than 0.05, indicating that there are significant differences between professional and skillful and between professional and beginner. The significance level between skillful and beginner level is P = 0.494 > 0.05. The results showed that there was no significant difference between the skillful and the beginner level of sports commitment in the adolescents’ sports health.Table 17
Multiple comparisons (LSD) for different sports levels.
(I) sports grade(J) sports gradeMD (I-J)SDPProfessionalSkillful0.40223∗0.07575≤0.001Beginner0.44205∗0.06826≤0.001SkillfulProfessional−0.40223∗0.07575≤0.001Beginner0.039820.058140.494BeginnerProfessional−0.44205∗0.06826≤0.001Skillful−0.039820.058140.494


### 3.3. Correlation and Regression-Mediation Analysis

Table18 shows the correlation analysis for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports. Correlation analysis [27] is performed in the questionnaire work for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports commitment. The correlation analysis of sports health and self-efficacy and sports commitment shows a significant correlation between youth sports health and sports commitment, significant activity level P<0.05, and Pearson correlation coefficients are 0.856, 0.815, and 0.662, respectively, indicating a significant positive correlation between sports health and self-efficacy and sports commitment, self-efficacy, and sports commitment.Table 18
Correlation analysis for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports commitment.
Sports healthSelf-efficacySports commitmentSports healthPearson correlation10.856∗∗0.815∗∗Significance (bilateral)0.0000.000N804804804Self-efficacyPearson correlation0.856∗∗10.662∗∗Significance (bilateral)0.0000.000N804804804Sports commitmentPearson correlation0.815∗∗0.662∗∗1Significance (bilateral)0.0000.000N804804804∗∗Significant correlation at 0.01 levels (bilateral).Table19 shows the regression-mediation analysis for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports commitment. Regression-mediation analysis [28] is performed in the questionnaire work for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports commitment. From the abovementioned analysis results, the significance level of P ≤ 0.001 < 0.05 is passed between sports health and sports commitment. The regression coefficient is of 0.206. The regression coefficient between sports health and sports commitment is 0.189, less than the regression coefficient of model 1, indicating the role of self-efficacy is partial intermediary between sports health and sports commitment.Table 19
Regression-mediation analysis for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports commitment.
ModelNonstandardized factorStandard factortSig.BStandard errorTrial version1(Constant)14.7850.88316.7500.000Sports commitment8.1890.2060.81539.8090.0002(Constant)8.7350.63913.6730.000Sports commitment4.4440.1890.44223.5750.000Self-efficacy5.5570.1850.56329.9970.000Model 1:R = 0.815, R2 = 0.664, adjustment R2 = 0.664, F = 1584.754, P≤0.001Model 2:R = 0.917, R2 = 0.842, adjustment R2 = 0.841, F = 2130.313, P≤0.001aDependent variable: sports health.


## 3.1. Analysis on the Current Situation of Self-Efficacy in Sports Health

Table2 shows the comparison of the difference of self-efficacy in sports health between different genders (independent sample t-test). Table 3 shows the self-efficacy analysis for different genders. The results of the independent sample t-test on the self-efficacy of sports health of teenagers of different genders showed that the statistical quantity t = −0.313 and the significance level P = 0.632 > 0.05, indicating that there is no significant difference between boys and girls in the self-efficacy of adolescent sports health; that is, both boys and girls have similar self-efficacy. In addition, it can be seen from the description table that there are 464 boys among 804 teenagers participating in the questionnaire. 340 female students and their self-efficacy scores averaged 3.95 and 3.98, respectively, which were basically the same.Table 2
Comparison of the difference of self-efficacy in sports health between different genders (independent sample t-test).
Levene’s test for the equation of varianceThe t-test for the mean value equationFSig.tdfSig. (bilateral)MDSD95% confidence intervalLowerUpperSelf-efficacyAssuming the variance is equal19.5830.000−0.4658020.642−0.023110.04973−0.120740.07451Assuming the variance is not equal−0.478790.3560.632−0.023110.04831−0.117950.07172Table 3
Self-efficacy analysis for different genders.
Self-efficacyNM±SDtPMale4643.95 ± 0.75−0.4780.632Female3403.98 ± 0.34Table4 shows the comparison of Self-efficacy of adolescents in different sports (one-way ANOVA analysis). Table 5 shows the self-efficacy analysis for different sports. One-way ANOVA results for self-efficacy of sports health of adolescents in different sports items showed that statistical F = 3.321 and significance level P = 0.010 < 0.05, indicating that, at the significance level of 5%, adolescents’ self-efficacy of sports health has significant differences among different sports items. It can be seen from the description table that, among the 804 teenagers who participated in the questionnaire, 253 are from taekwondo, and the average self-efficacy score of this project is 3.96. The least is swimming teenagers, with 119 teenagers, and the average score is 3.89. Among them, basketball sport has the highest average score, with the average score of 4.14.Table 4
Comparison of self-efficacy of adolescents in different sports (one-way ANOVA analysis).
Quadratic sumdfMean squareFSig.Interblock6.36841.5923.3210.010Within the group382.9817990.479Total389.349803Table 5
Self-efficacy analysis for different sports.
Self-efficacyNM±SDFPBasketball1514.14 ± 0.693.321≤0.001Swimming1193.89 ± 0.64Tennis1483.88 ± 0.70Taekwondo2533.96 ± 0.74Archery1333.94 ± 0.70Table6 shows the multiple comparisons (with least significant difference, LSD) to see the differences between the various sports. The results in the table show that the P values of significance between basketball and swimming, tennis, taekwondo, and archery are 0.003, 0.001, 0.012, and 0.017, respectively, all less than 0.05, indicating that there are significant differences in the sense of self-efficacy of the youth’s sports health between basketball and swimming, basketball and tennis, basketball and taekwondo, and basketball and archery.Table 6
Multiple comparisons (with least significant difference, LSD) to see the differences between the various sports.
(I) sports(J) sportsMD (I-J)SEPBasketballSwimming0.24903∗0.084870.003Tennis0.25805∗0.08008≤0.001Taekwondo0.17938∗0.071200.012Archery0.19758∗0.082330.017Table7 shows the comparison of self-efficacy of adolescents with different sports levels in sports health with ANOVA. Table 8 shows the self-efficacy analysis for different exercise levels. One-way ANOVA was carried out on the self-efficacy of sports health of adolescents at different sports levels. The results showed that the statistical quantity F = 31.045, and the significance level P<0.05, indicating that the self-efficacy of sports health of adolescents at the significance level of 5% was significantly different among different sports levels. It also can be seen from the description table that, among the 804 teenagers who participated in the questionnaire, 436 of them are in the stage of beginners, with an average of 3.89, 143 of them are in the professional level, and 225 of them are in the skillful level, with an average of 4.36 and 3.85, respectively. From the mean value, it can be seen that adolescents in the professional level have the highest self-efficacy of sports health. Subsequently, we used multiple comparisons (with least significant difference, LSD) to look at the differences between the exercise levels.Table 7
Comparison of self-efficacy of adolescents with different sports levels in sports health with ANOVA.
Quadratic sumdfMean squareFSig.Interblock28.009214.00531.0450.000Within the group361.3408010.451Total389.349803Table 8
Self-efficacy analysis for different exercise levels.
Self-efficacyNM±SDFPProfessional1434.36 ± 0.6231.045≤0.001Skillful2253.85 ± 0.72Beginner4363.89 ± 0.70Table9 shows the multiple comparisons (LSD) for differences in exercise levels. The results of multiple comparisons showed that the significance level P values between the professional level and the skillful level, the professional level, and the beginner level are all ≤0.001, which is less than 0.05, indicating that there are significant differences in self-efficacy between the professional level and the skillful level and between the professional level and the beginner level. The significance level between the skillful level and the beginner level is P = 0.408 > 0.05. The results showed that there was no significant difference between the skillful level and the beginner level in the self-efficacy of adolescents’ sports health.Table 9
Multiple comparisons (LSD) for differences in exercise levels.
(I) sports grade(J) sports gradeMD (I-J)SDPProfessionalSkillful0.51549∗0.07183≤0.001Beginner0.46988∗0.06472≤0.001SkillfulProfessional−0.51549∗0.07183≤0.001Beginner−0.045610.055130.408BeginnerProfessional−0.46988∗0.06472≤0.001Skillful0.045610.055130.408


## 3.2. Analysis on the Current Situation of Exercise Commitment of Adolescent Sports Health

Table10 shows the comparison of the differences of exercise commitment in sports health among adolescents of different genders (independent sample t-test). Table 11 shows the sports commitment for different genders. The results of the independent sample t-test on exercise health and exercise commitment of adolescents of different genders showed that the statistical quantity t = 1.959 and the significance level P = 0.044 < 0.05, indicating that, at the significance level of 5%, there is a significant difference between boys’ and girls’ sports commitment in adolescent sports health. In addition, it can be seen from the description table that the mean value of 464 boys’ sports commitment among 804 teenagers participating in the questionnaire is 4.11. The average of 340 female students’ sports commitment was 4.01, and the score of male students’ sports commitment was significantly higher than that of female students, indicating that male students are more enthusiastic and fond of sports than female students.Table 10
Comparison of the differences of exercise commitment in sports health among adolescents of different genders (independent sample t-test).
Levene’s test for the equation of varianceThe t-test for the mean value equationFSig.tdfSig. (bilateral)MDSD95% confidence intervalLowerUpperSports commitmentAssuming the variance is equal14.3590.0001.9158020.0560.099160.05177−0.002460.20078Assuming the variance is not equal1.959780.6470.0440.099160.05062−0.000210.19852Table 11
Sports commitment for different genders.
Sports commitmentNM ± SDtPMale4644.11 ± 0.771.9590.044Female3404.01 ± 0.66Table12 shows the comparison of differences in exercise commitment of adolescents in different sports using ANOVA. Table 13 shows the sports commitment for different sport types. One-way ANOVA analysis of sports commitment for sports health of adolescents in different sports shows that F = 2.812 and significance level P = 0.025 < 0.05, indicating that there are significant differences between sports commitment and sports health of adolescents in different sports at the significance level of 5%. From the description table, it can be seen that, among the 804 teenagers who participated in the questionnaire, the highest mean value is that of 151 teenagers who participated in basketball sports, reaching 4.21, followed by swimming and taekwondo, both of which are 4.06, and the lowest is that of archery, only 3.99. Subsequently, we used multiple comparisons (LSD) to look at the differences of exercise commitment among different sports.Table 12
Comparison of differences in exercise commitment of adolescents in different sports using ANOVA.
Quadratic sumdfMean squareFSig.Interblock7.15441.7892.8120.025Within the group508.1447990.636Total515.298803Table 13
Sports commitment for different sport types.
Sports commitmentNM ± SDFPBasketball1514.21 ± 0.712.8120.025Swimming1194.06 ± 0.63Tennis1484.01 ± 0.72Taekwondo2534.06 ± 0.75Archery1333.99 ± 0.78Table14 shows the multiple comparisons (LSD) for differences in sports commitment among different sports. Multiple comparison results showed that the P values of significance level between basketball and tennis, taekwondo, and archery were 0.013, 0.034, and 0.011, respectively, which were all less than 0.05, indicating that, at the significance level of 5%, there were significant differences in the self-efficacy of adolescent sports health between basketball and tennis, basketball and taekwondo, and basketball and archery. There was no significant difference between basketball and swimming, P = 0.076 > 0.05.Table 14
Multiple comparisons (LSD) for differences in sports commitment among different sports.
(I) sports(J) sportsMD (I-J)SDPBasketballSwimming0.157990.088780.076Tennis0.20826∗0.083780.013Taekwondo0.15792∗0.074480.034Archery0.21958∗0.086130.011Table15 shows the comparison of differences in sports commitment among adolescents with different sports levels in sports health using ANOVA. Table 16 shows the sports commitment for different sports levels. One-way ANOVA was conducted for sports commitment of adolescents with different sports levels. The results showed that F = 21.747 and significance level P<0.05, indicating that, at the significance level of 5%, there was a significant difference in sports commitment of adolescents with different sports levels. It also can be seen from the description table that, among the 804 teenagers who participated in the questionnaire, 436 of them are in the stage of beginner, with an average value of 3.97. The average value of sports commitment of 143 teenagers in the professional level is the highest, reaching 4.42. The average value of the last 225 teenagers in the skillful level is 4.02. From the mean value, it can be seen that the sports health commitment of adolescents in the professional level is the highest, followed by skillful level, and the lowest among those beginners. This indicates that exercise induces higher score of sports commitment. Subsequently, we used multiple comparisons (LSD) to look at the differences between the sports levels.Table 15
Comparison of differences in sports commitment among adolescents with different sports levels in sports health using ANOVA.
Quadratic sumdfMean squareFSig.Interblock21.821210.91121.7470.000Within the group401.8768010.502Total423.698803Table 16
Sports commitment for different sports levels.
Sports commitmentNM ± SDFPProfessional1434.42 ± 0.6321.747≤0.001Skillful2254.02 ± 0.73Beginner4363.98 ± 0.72Table17 shows the multiple comparisons (LSD) for different the sports levels. The results of the abovementioned multiple comparisons show that the significance P values between professional and skillful and between professional and beginner level are all ≤0.001, which is less than 0.05, indicating that there are significant differences between professional and skillful and between professional and beginner. The significance level between skillful and beginner level is P = 0.494 > 0.05. The results showed that there was no significant difference between the skillful and the beginner level of sports commitment in the adolescents’ sports health.Table 17
Multiple comparisons (LSD) for different sports levels.
(I) sports grade(J) sports gradeMD (I-J)SDPProfessionalSkillful0.40223∗0.07575≤0.001Beginner0.44205∗0.06826≤0.001SkillfulProfessional−0.40223∗0.07575≤0.001Beginner0.039820.058140.494BeginnerProfessional−0.44205∗0.06826≤0.001Skillful−0.039820.058140.494


## 3.3. Correlation and Regression-Mediation Analysis

Table18 shows the correlation analysis for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports. Correlation analysis [27] is performed in the questionnaire work for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports commitment. The correlation analysis of sports health and self-efficacy and sports commitment shows a significant correlation between youth sports health and sports commitment, significant activity level P<0.05, and Pearson correlation coefficients are 0.856, 0.815, and 0.662, respectively, indicating a significant positive correlation between sports health and self-efficacy and sports commitment, self-efficacy, and sports commitment.Table 18
Correlation analysis for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports commitment.
Sports healthSelf-efficacySports commitmentSports healthPearson correlation10.856∗∗0.815∗∗Significance (bilateral)0.0000.000N804804804Self-efficacyPearson correlation0.856∗∗10.662∗∗Significance (bilateral)0.0000.000N804804804Sports commitmentPearson correlation0.815∗∗0.662∗∗1Significance (bilateral)0.0000.000N804804804∗∗Significant correlation at 0.01 levels (bilateral).Table19 shows the regression-mediation analysis for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports commitment. Regression-mediation analysis [28] is performed in the questionnaire work for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports commitment. From the abovementioned analysis results, the significance level of P ≤ 0.001 < 0.05 is passed between sports health and sports commitment. The regression coefficient is of 0.206. The regression coefficient between sports health and sports commitment is 0.189, less than the regression coefficient of model 1, indicating the role of self-efficacy is partial intermediary between sports health and sports commitment.Table 19
Regression-mediation analysis for sports health, self-efficacy, and sports commitment.
ModelNonstandardized factorStandard factortSig.BStandard errorTrial version1(Constant)14.7850.88316.7500.000Sports commitment8.1890.2060.81539.8090.0002(Constant)8.7350.63913.6730.000Sports commitment4.4440.1890.44223.5750.000Self-efficacy5.5570.1850.56329.9970.000Model 1:R = 0.815, R2 = 0.664, adjustment R2 = 0.664, F = 1584.754, P≤0.001Model 2:R = 0.917, R2 = 0.842, adjustment R2 = 0.841, F = 2130.313, P≤0.001aDependent variable: sports health.


## 4. Conclusions

In this work, investigation and analysis were carried out on the health promotion by the typical sports using self-efficacy and sports commitment questionnaires for 804 teenagers, who were from different interest-oriented sport classes. Five typical interest-oriented sport classes were selected due to the difference in sport characteristics: basketball, swimming, tennis, taekwondo, and archery. Statistical analysis, ANOVA analysis, and multiple comparisons (LSD) were applied to the collected data. Some findings from the analysis include (1) boys and girls have similar self-efficacy of adolescent sports health; (2) adolescents’ self-efficacy of sports health has significant differences among different sports items, where the basketball group scored the highest; (3) adolescents in the professional level have the highest self-efficacy of sports health, whereas the skillful level and beginner level have no significant difference; (4) male students are more enthusiastic and fond of sports than female students; (5) there are significant differences between sports commitment and sports health of adolescents in different sports, where the basketball group scored the highest; (6) exercise induces higher score of sports commitment; however, no significant difference is observed for the skillful level and the beginner level; (7) significant positive correlation between sports health and self-efficacy and sports commitment, self-efficacy, and sports commitment; and (8) the role of self-efficacy plays a partial intermediary between sports health and sports commitment.



---

*Source: 8677182-2021-08-31.xml*