# Systematic review of measurement instruments for positive development in sports: main characteristics and reported validity evidence

## TL;DR

This paper reviews tools used to measure positive development in sports, highlighting gaps in their validity and inclusivity.

## Contribution

The study systematically identifies and evaluates measurement instruments for positive development in sports, revealing critical limitations and gaps.

## Key findings

- Most instruments are based on Positive Youth Development theories and focus on youth, with limited tools for older athletes.
- Internal structure validity and internal consistency are the most commonly reported validity evidence.
- Instruments are predominantly developed in high-income countries, with limited representation of diverse populations.

## Abstract

Positive development in sports (PDS) is a theoretical framework emphasizing human potential development in sports participation. Despite theoretical advancements, operationalizing PDS remains challenging, given the scarcity of instruments that translate theoretical models into practical applications in sports.

This systematic review aimed to identify measurement instruments for assessing positive development in sports, their theoretical foundations, and validity evidence supporting their use.

This study follows COSMIN guidelines and includes a comprehensive search across MEDLINE, PubMed PMC, PsycINFO, AgeLine, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. The search strategy refined with expert input yielded 702 records, with 41 meeting inclusion criteria (i.e., peer-reviewed original studies focused on the development, adaptation, or validation of measurement instruments assessing positive development in sports or related constructs). Screening was performed by two researchers in a double-blind process, with conflicts resolved by a third researcher. Data extracted included sample characteristics, theoretical underpinnings, and psychometric properties.

Most instruments were grounded in Positive Youth Development theories and Basic Psychological Needs. Internal structure validity and internal consistency were the primary types of evidence reported, with Cronbach’s alpha widely used. Despite recognition that human potential can be developed across the lifespan, instruments primarily targeted youth in sports contexts, with limited tools for older cohorts, revealing a significant gap. Most instruments originated in high-income countries, such as those in North America and Europe, underscoring the need for adaptations of theories and tools for low- and middle-income regions.

Underrepresentation of diverse populations with regards to race, ethnicity, and gender, absence of interpretative norms, and limited focus on older cohorts were critical limitations. Addressing these gaps can enhance PDS instruments’ inclusivity and applicability, ultimately fostering more inclusive and impactful sports practices. Furthermore, the results indicate the need to develop instruments rooted in robust PDS theoretical models alongside theoretical revisions to better represent diverse populations and people from middle- and low-income countries, in addition to the adequate adaptation of instruments.