Abstract
Background
The study explores the impact of adaptive sports programs on emotional resilience, empathy development, social inclusion, and cognitive flexibility among participants.
Methods
Using a quantitative research design, data were collected from 455 individuals actively engaged in adaptive sports programs across diverse institutions and organizations. Structural equation modeling was employed to examine the direct and indirect relationships between the constructs.
Results
The findings reveal that adaptive sports programs significantly enhance emotional resilience and empathy development, which, in turn, positively influence social inclusion and cognitive flexibility. Mediation analysis further confirms the critical role of emotional resilience and empathy in strengthening these relationships.
Conclusion
The study highlights the importance of adaptive sports programs in fostering key psychosocial and cognitive outcomes, emphasizing their potential to create inclusive and transformative environments. These insights contribute to the growing body of literature on adaptive sports and provide practical implications for policymakers, educators, and program designers aiming to promote inclusivity and personal growth through sports.
Keywords: Adaptive sports programs, Emotional resilience, Empathy development, Social inclusion, Cognitive flexibility
Introduction
Adaptive sports programs, as inclusive initiatives designed to accommodate individuals of diverse abilities [1], hold significant promise for fostering key psychosocial and cognitive outcomes [2]. These programs provide structured environments where participants can engage in physical activities tailored to their needs, promoting personal growth and social interaction [3]. Among the most critical outcomes of such programs are social inclusion and cognitive flexibility. Social inclusion, a fundamental dependent variable, is defined as an individual’s sense of belonging and active participation within a group or community [4]. Cognitive flexibility, another essential outcome, reflects the ability to adapt to changing environments and think creatively when faced with new challenges [5]. Despite the growing recognition of adaptive sports programs, their specific impact on these dependent variables has been insufficiently explored in empirical research.
This study addresses how participation in adaptive sports programs promotes social inclusion and cognitive flexibility, with a particular focus on the mediating roles of emotional resilience and empathy.
Research indicates that participation in adaptive sports programs provides more than just physical engagement [2]; it offers a unique environment where individuals can cultivate essential personal attributes, such as emotional resilience [1], necessary for navigating life’s challenges. Studies have shown that these programs create opportunities for participants to face structured difficulties [6], which enable them to develop the capacity to recover from setbacks and adapt to adversity. Emotional resilience is particularly relevant for promoting broader outcomes such as fostering a sense of belonging within communities (i.e., social inclusion) and enhancing problem-solving abilities in dynamic environments (i.e., cognitive flexibility) [5]. Despite increasing acknowledgment of the benefits of adaptive sports programs, there remains limited empirical clarity on the specific psychological and social mechanisms that facilitate these transformations. In particular, the pathways through which structured participation fosters emotional resilience and empathy—ultimately enhancing social inclusion and cognitive flexibility—have not been thoroughly examined. This gap underscores the need to unpack the internal processes and interpersonal dynamics embedded within adaptive sports environments that translate physical engagement into broader psychosocial and cognitive development.
Research has also highlighted the role of inclusive environments in nurturing meaningful interpersonal connections among participants [7]. Authors in this domain suggest that adaptive sports programs, by fostering collaboration and shared experiences among individuals of diverse backgrounds, provide a fertile ground for deeper understanding and mutual respect [8], which facilitates empathy development. These interactions often lead to the development of interpersonal skills that enhance an individual’s ability to engage socially (social inclusion) and think critically (cognitive flexibility). While previous studies have recognized the broader benefits of empathy, its specific function as a pathway between program participation and long-term outcomes has not been adequately addressed [9]. This study aims to build on existing research by investigating how emotional resilience and empathy development function as key mechanisms in translating the benefits of adaptive sports into significant social and cognitive outcomes.
The study is situated within the context of adaptive sports programs offered in inclusive physical education settings. Inclusive physical education represents a unique and underexplored domain where individuals with varied abilities engage collaboratively, often challenging societal norms around ability and inclusion [10]. This context provides a compelling setting to investigate how structured sports interventions can promote social and cognitive growth. While existing research on inclusive education has primarily focused on academic outcomes [11], there is a lack of studies exploring how adaptive sports contribute to broader psychosocial and cognitive dimensions. By examining these programs in this context, the study offers a nuanced understanding of how inclusivity in physical education can extend beyond skill acquisition to foster holistic personal development. This contextual focus enhances the relevance of the findings and provides practical insights for educators, program designers, and policymakers. In summary, this study examines how participation in adaptive sports programs enhances emotional resilience and empathy, which in turn promote social inclusion and cognitive flexibility, using a structural equation modeling approach to test these relationships within inclusive physical education settings.
Theoretical framework
Adaptive sports programs and emotional resilience
Adaptive sports programs offer inclusive opportunities for individuals of diverse abilities to engage in structured physical activities that promote physical, emotional, and psychological well-being [1]. These programs expose participants to challenges, setbacks, and team-based collaboration, providing an environment that fosters emotional resilience. Emotional resilience refers to an individual’s capacity to recover from adversity, manage stress, and adapt positively to challenging circumstances [12]. Through participation in adaptive sports, individuals learn to persevere in the face of physical and psychological challenges, developing coping mechanisms that strengthen their emotional resilience over time [13]. Existing research has demonstrated that physical activities and sports interventions significantly contribute to emotional resilience by helping individuals manage stress and navigate adversity effectively. Junnarkar et al. [14] found that participation in structured physical activities positively impacts emotional well-being by developing resilience and adaptive coping mechanisms. Similarly, Mladenović Li et al. [15] emphasize that sports engagement strengthens an individual’s ability to regulate emotions and maintain a positive outlook in the face of adversity.
Based on the above supporting evidence, the current study proposes:
Hypothesis 1a: participation in adaptive sports programs is positively related to emotional resilience
Adaptive sports programs and empathy development
Participation in adaptive sports programs provides an inclusive and collaborative environment that facilitates meaningful interpersonal interactions, which are critical for developing empathy. Empathy, defined as the ability to perceive, understand, and share the emotions of others [9], emerges through shared experiences and cooperation in group settings. Adaptive sports programs, by their nature, encourage participants to work alongside individuals with diverse abilities, fostering sensitivity toward others’ emotions and perspectives. This process creates opportunities for individuals to recognize the challenges faced by their peers, enhancing their ability to relate to others emotionally and respond with understanding and compassion [14]. Existing literature supports the link between structured physical activities and empathy development. For instance, Zhang et al. [16] found that participation in sports programs enhanced emotional awareness and interpersonal understanding among participants. Similarly, Duan et al. [17] highlight the role of inclusive sports settings in creating a sense of community and fostering prosocial behaviors such as empathy and emotional support. These studies suggest that the collaborative and supportive nature of adaptive sports programs allows participants to observe, interpret, and connect with others’ emotional experiences, thus strengthening their empathetic abilities.
Based on this rationale and the theoretical foundation, the current study proposes:
Hypothesis 1b: participation in adaptive sports programs is positively related to empathy development
Emotional resilience and social inclusion
Emotional resilience plays a vital role in fostering an individual’s sense of belonging and active participation within social settings. Social inclusion, which reflects an individual’s ability to engage meaningfully and feel accepted within a group or community [4], is closely linked to the ability to navigate emotional challenges. Emotionally resilient individuals are better equipped to regulate their emotional responses, handle interpersonal stressors, and persist in building social connections even in the face of setbacks [13]. This ability to remain composed and maintain positive emotional energy creates opportunities for individuals to develop trust, build relationships, and integrate into social environments [18]. Wagstaff et al. [19] found that emotional resilience plays a crucial role in enabling individuals to overcome interpersonal challenges and build meaningful relationships. Similarly, Junnakar et al. [14] demonstrated that resilient individuals were more likely to engage actively in social activities and experience a stronger sense of community belonging. SHI et al. [20] also highlight the role of structured physical activities in fostering emotional resilience, which, in turn, enhances social integration and connectedness.
Based on the above supporting evidence, the current study proposes:
Hypothesis 2a: emotional resilience is positively related to social inclusion
Empathy development and social inclusion
Empathy plays a fundamental role in fostering social inclusion by promoting meaningful interpersonal connections and mutual acceptance within groups [21]. Social inclusion reflects an individual’s active participation and sense of belonging in a community, which is greatly facilitated by empathetic individuals who engage with others in supportive and understanding ways [4]. Empathy enables individuals to interpret and respond effectively to the emotions and needs of others, reducing barriers to communication and fostering trust, both of which are critical for inclusive group dynamics [22]. Empirical research supports the role of empathy in enhancing social inclusion. For instance, Ruiz-Montero et al. [23] found that empathy promotes prosocial behaviors, such as cooperation and emotional support, which are essential for building inclusive and connected communities. Similarly, Li and Shao [24] demonstrated that inclusive physical activity programs foster empathy by encouraging individuals to engage with others’ experiences, leading to stronger interpersonal bonds and a heightened sense of belonging. Further, Amiel [25] emphasize that programs promoting teamwork and collaboration significantly enhance empathy, resulting in more inclusive and cohesive group dynamics.
Addressing this gap, the current study builds on theoretical and empirical foundations to propose:
Hypothesis 2b: empathy development is positively related to social inclusion
Emotional resilience and cognitive flexibility
Emotional resilience enables individuals to regulate stress and overcome setbacks, freeing cognitive resources to think more creatively and approach problems with flexibility [13]. Through the development of resilience, individuals are better equipped to manage difficult situations without becoming overwhelmed, thereby fostering their ability to consider alternative solutions and strategies. Previous research has consistently demonstrated the positive relationship between emotional resilience and cognitive outcomes. For instance, Aronen et al. [26] found that emotional resilience enables individuals to generate positive emotions that broaden their cognitive capacity and promote flexible problem-solving. Similarly, Li et al. [27] highlight that resilient individuals are better able to regulate stress, allowing them to allocate cognitive resources effectively and respond to challenges with creativity and adaptability. Ocampo [18] further emphasize the role of structured physical activity in fostering emotional resilience, which contributes to improved cognitive functioning and adaptability.
Based on this theoretical foundation and supporting evidence, the current study proposes:
Hypothesis 3a: emotional resilience is positively related to cognitive flexibility
Empathy development and cognitive flexibility
Empathy promotes cognitive flexibility by encouraging individuals to take the perspectives of others, challenge their own assumptions, and consider alternative ways of thinking [28]. By engaging in empathy-driven perspective-taking, individuals enhance their ability to navigate complex environments and respond creatively to challenges [29]. Empirical evidence further corroborates the positive link between empathy development and cognitive flexibility. For example, Kara et al. [30] demonstrated that empathy enhances cognitive processes such as perspective-taking and mental flexibility by encouraging individuals to adopt alternative viewpoints. Similarly, Sugden et al. [31] found that empathy enables individuals to navigate complex social dynamics, promoting adaptive thinking and decision-making. Balçıkanlı et al. [32] emphasized that inclusive environments, such as adaptive sports programs, create opportunities for empathy development, which strengthens participants’ ability to respond to changing situations with creativity and flexibility. Bahmani et al. [33] also highlight the role of shared physical activities in fostering empathy, leading to enhanced cognitive and social adaptability.
Based on this theoretical foundation and supporting empirical evidence, the current study proposes:
Hypothesis 3b: empathy development is positively related to cognitive flexibility
Mediating effects
Participation in adaptive sports programs exposes individuals to obstacles and group-based challenges, creating opportunities to build emotional resilience through coping strategies, persistence, and emotional regulation [1]. As individuals develop resilience, they become better equipped to achieve social inclusion and exhibit cognitive flexibility. Social inclusion, which reflects a sense of belonging and active participation in social settings [34], is fostered by resilient individuals who can regulate their emotions, manage interpersonal difficulties, and build positive relationships within group contexts. The Conservation of Resources (COR) Theory [35] provides a strong theoretical foundation for this relationship, suggesting that emotional resilience acts as a psychological resource that enables individuals to invest in building social connections and overcoming social barriers. According to Conservation of Resources (COR) theory [35], individuals strive to acquire, maintain, and protect valuable resources—such as psychological resilience and social-emotional capacities like empathy—in order to manage stress and achieve well-being. Adaptive sports programs, by offering structured challenges, peer collaboration, and supportive environments, act as resource-enriching settings where individuals can build these critical resources. Participation in such programs can foster emotional resilience through exposure to adversity and coping experiences, and develop empathy through repeated social interactions and perspective-taking. These mechanisms align with the COR framework, which posits that resource gains in emotionally supportive environments enhance adaptive outcomes.
Empirical studies highlight the role of emotional resilience in enhancing social integration and belonging by enabling individuals to persevere through social challenges [12]. For instance, Orr et al. [11] emphasize that physical activities enhance emotional resilience, which, in turn, promotes social connectedness.
In addition to social inclusion, emotional resilience significantly contributes to cognitive flexibility, which refers to the ability to adapt one’s thinking and behavior in response to new or changing circumstances [36]. Emotional resilience helps individuals regulate emotional stress and maintain cognitive clarity, enabling them to approach problems creatively and consider alternative perspectives [37]. Adaptive sports programs, through exposure to challenges and opportunities for overcoming setbacks, build emotional strength that empowers individuals to think more adaptively in dynamic settings. Research has shown that resilient individuals are better equipped to engage in flexible and adaptive problem-solving processes [38].
Based on the theoretical framework and empirical evidence, the current study proposes:
Hypothesis 4a: emotional resilience mediates the positive relationship between adaptive sports programs and social inclusion
Hypothesis 4b: emotional resilience mediates the positive relationship between adaptive sports programs and cognitive flexibility
In addition, adaptive sports programs encourage teamwork, shared challenges, and interpersonal support, providing participants with opportunities to engage in perspective-taking and emotional attunement [2]. These interactions help participants cultivate empathy, which enables them to build meaningful connections with others and approach dynamic situations with greater adaptability [9]. From the perspective of Conservation of Resources (COR) Theory [35], both emotional resilience and empathy are viewed as critical psychological and social resources that individuals seek to protect and expand. Emotional resilience helps prevent further resource loss by enabling individuals to recover quickly from setbacks and maintain emotional stability when facing adversity [13]. In the context of adaptive sports, where participants regularly encounter physical and social challenges, resilience acts as a buffer, preserving mental energy and reducing the psychological toll of stress [27]. Simultaneously, empathy serves as a proactive resource that facilitates the acquisition of additional social capital—such as trust, cooperation, and emotional support—through the formation of meaningful relationships. By fostering empathetic understanding, participants are better equipped to navigate group dynamics, elicit support from peers, and build inclusive environments [31]. These resource gains further enhance an individual’s capacity to adapt cognitively and socially, reinforcing a positive cycle of psychological investment and recovery. Empathy enhances social inclusion by fostering trust, understanding, and mutual acceptance within groups [30]. Through their empathetic abilities, individuals can navigate interpersonal challenges, build meaningful relationships, and experience a stronger sense of belonging [30]. Research supports this link, with studies demonstrating that empathy positively influences social connectedness and group cohesion, particularly in collaborative settings such as sports [25]. For example, Bahmani et al. [33] found that empathetic individuals were more likely to engage actively in social environments, fostering inclusive group dynamics.
In addition to facilitating social inclusion, empathy development significantly contributes to cognitive flexibility, the ability to adapt thinking and behavior when faced with new or changing situations [39]. Empathy enhances cognitive flexibility by encouraging individuals to consider alternative perspectives, challenge their own assumptions, and approach problems creatively [28]. Adaptive sports programs, through their focus on collaboration and shared emotional experiences, provide opportunities for individuals to develop these skills. Empirical research supports this link, demonstrating that empathy enables individuals to adapt to complex social and cognitive challenges more effectively [37]. For instance, Cai and Qi [29] emphasize that perspective-taking, a core aspect of empathy, enhances flexible thinking by broadening individuals’ understanding of different viewpoints and problem-solving strategies. Figure 1 presents the conceptual model of the study.
Fig. 1.
Conceptual model
Based on this theoretical and empirical foundation, the current study proposes:
Hypothesis 5a: empathy development mediates the positive relationship between adaptive sports programs and social inclusion
Hypothesis 5b: empathy development mediates the positive relationship between adaptive sports programs and cognitive flexibility
Method
The research adopts a quantitative approach to examine the relationships between adaptive sports programs, emotional resilience, empathy development, social inclusion, and cognitive flexibility. The study was conducted using a structured questionnaire to ensure consistency in data collection and to enhance the reliability of responses. The target population for this study included participants enrolled in adaptive sports programs across various educational institutions and community sports centres.
Targeted respondents and sampling procedure
The study focused on individuals actively participating in adaptive sports programs, as they represented the most relevant demographic to explore the proposed relationships. To ensure diversity and generalizability, respondents were recruited from multiple institutions and organizations offering adaptive sports initiatives. The sampling strategy employed was convenience sampling, which allowed for efficient access to participants while accommodating logistical constraints.
Participants were approached through direct communication and collaboration with program administrators, coaches, and facilitators. Initially, the purpose of the study was explained to these stakeholders, who subsequently facilitated access to the participants. Announcements and invitations were shared during sports sessions, and interested participants were provided with detailed instructions for completing the survey.
Data collection process
Data collection was carried out over a period of three month, spanning May to July 2024, ensuring ample time to reach the target sample size of 455 respondents. The survey instrument was distributed both in person and electronically, depending on the accessibility and preferences of the participants. For in-person data collection, printed questionnaires were provided at the end of sports sessions, with research assistants present to address any queries. For electronic data collection, a link to an online survey platform was shared with participants via email and messaging applications.
To maintain a high response rate, participants were reassured about the confidentiality of their responses and informed that the data would be used solely for academic purposes. In addition, reminders were sent periodically to encourage completion of the survey. The inclusion criteria required participants to have been involved in an adaptive sports program for at least three months, ensuring that their responses reflected meaningful experiences. The survey instrument comprised multiple standardized scales adapted from validated measures in previous studies, each aligned with the constructs of interest—namely, emotional resilience, empathy, social inclusion, and cognitive flexibility. These items were pretested for clarity and internal consistency before full-scale distribution.
The adaptive sports programs included in the study were delivered across various settings, including university-based inclusive physical education departments, local community adaptive sports centers, and NGO-supported rehabilitation and recreation programs. All participating institutions shared a commitment to structured, inclusive, and goal-oriented physical activity designed to accommodate individuals of diverse physical and cognitive abilities.
Sample characteristics
A total of 518 individuals were invited to participate in the study. Of these, 474 responded to the survey (response rate: 91.5%). After screening for eligibility and data completeness, 19 responses were excluded due to incomplete answers or failure to meet the inclusion criteria (e.g., participation in the program for less than three months). The final sample consisted of 455 valid responses, which were used for the analysis. Participants with known neurological or psychiatric disorders, substance abuse issues, or ongoing psychopharmacological treatment were excluded from the study based on self-reported screening questions included at the beginning of the survey.
Further, to ensure data quality, responses with completion times that were abnormally short (less than 3 min) or excessively long (over 45 min) were flagged and excluded, as they were considered indicative of inattentiveness or disengagement.
Prior to analysis, data were screened for quality. Responses with excessive missing values (> 20%) were excluded, and remaining missing values were minimal and handled using mean substitution. Normality was assessed through skewness and kurtosis statistics, which were within acceptable ranges for SEM analysis. Additionally, response patterns were examined for straight-lining (e.g., selecting the same option across all items), and such cases were removed to ensure data validity.
The final sample size of 455 participants meets and exceeds the recommended thresholds for Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). According to [40], a minimum sample size of 10 times the maximum number of inner or outer model paths is suggested for adequate statistical power in PLS-SEM. Given that the most complex construct in our model has four predictors, the minimum requirement would be 40 cases, well below our actual sample size. Additionally, prior Monte Carlo simulations suggest that a sample of over 200 provides sufficient power (> 0.80) for detecting medium-sized effects in mediation models [41]. Therefore, the sample of 455 is considered robust for both measurement and structural model estimation. The sample included participants of diverse age groups, genders, education levels, and socioeconomic backgrounds, aligning with the study’s goal of capturing a wide spectrum of experiences. These demographic variables were also used as control variables to account for their potential influence on the key constructs. Specifically, these control variables were incorporated into the structural equation model to assess whether demographic factors had significant effects on the endogenous variables.
Ethical considerations
Ethical approval was obtained prior to data collection, and all participants provided informed consent. The anonymity of respondents was maintained throughout the study, and they were given the option to withdraw at any time without providing a reason. The study received ethical clearance from the Ethics Committee of the School of Physical Education at Liaoning Normal University, which ensured that the research adhered to established ethical standards for studies involving human participants.
This rigorous data collection process ensures that the study findings are both reliable and representative, providing valuable insights into the role of adaptive sports programs in fostering emotional resilience, empathy development, social inclusion, and cognitive flexibility.
Demographics
The demographic profile of the 455 respondents revealed a diverse mix of participants, contributing to the robustness and generalizability of the study’s findings. In terms of gender, 53% of the respondents were male, while 47% were female, reflecting a fairly balanced representation. The age distribution indicated that 23% of the participants were under 20 years old, 38% were between 21 and 30 years, 25% were between 31 and 40 years, and 14% were over 40 years, ensuring insights from a broad age range. The overall mean age of participants was 28.4 years (SD = 8.2). Male participants (n = 241) had a mean age of 29.1 years (SD = 8.5), while female participants (n = 214) had a mean age of 27.5 years (SD = 7.8). Regarding education levels, 28% of the respondents held a secondary school qualification, 35% were undergraduate students, 22% had completed a postgraduate degree, and 15% had professional or vocational training. Socioeconomic status was categorized based on participants’ self-reported income levels, with 24% identifying as low-income, 48% as middle-income, and 28% as high-income. Demographic characteristics by gender, including educational level and socioeconomic status, are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1.
Demographics
| Variable | Male (n = 241) | Female (n = 214) | Total (N = 455) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Age (SD) | 29.1 (8.5) | 27.5 (7.8) | 28.4 (8.2) |
| Education Level | |||
| Secondary School | 58 (24.1%) | 69 (32.2%) | 127 (27.9%) |
| Undergraduate | 89 (36.9%) | 70 (32.7%) | 159 (35.0%) |
| Postgraduate | 58 (24.1%) | 41 (19.2%) | 99 (21.8%) |
| Professional/Vocational | 36 (14.9%) | 34 (15.9%) | 70 (15.4%) |
| Socioeconomic Status | |||
| Low-income | 58 (24.1%) | 51 (23.8%) | 109 (24.0%) |
| Middle-income | 115 (47.7%) | 104 (48.6%) | 219 (48.1%) |
| High-income | 68 (28.2%) | 59 (27.6%) | 127 (27.9%) |
Research instruments
The questionnaire for this study was designed to assess the constructs outlined in the conceptual model. Each construct was measured using items adapted from established scales, ensuring validity and reliability. A 5-point Likert scale was used for all items, with responses ranging from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree.
Adaptive sports programs
This construct was measured using eight items developed to capture participants’ perceptions of inclusivity, collaboration, safety, and skill development in adaptive sports programs. Items were adapted from existing scales measuring program engagement and inclusivity in physical education contexts [42, 43]. A sample item is: “The program promotes teamwork among participants.” Higher scores indicate greater perceived quality and inclusivity of the adaptive sports program. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was 0.856.
Emotional resilience
Emotional resilience was measured with five items adapted from the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) [44]. These items focused on participants’ ability to recover from setbacks, remain calm under stress, and manage emotions in challenging situations. A sample item is: “I am able to adapt when changes occur.” Higher scores indicate greater emotional resilience. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was 0.769.
Empathy development
Empathy development was assessed with five items adapted from the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) [21]. These items reflected participants’ ability to understand others’ emotions, take different perspectives, and provide support during challenging situations. A sample item is: “I try to look at everyone’s side of a disagreement before I make a decision.” Higher scores represent greater empathy development. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was 0.761.
Social inclusion
Social inclusion was measured using seven items adapted from scales assessing social integration and belonging in group settings [34]. Items focused on feelings of acceptance, belonging, and confidence fostered by the program. A sample item is: “I feel like a valued member of my group.” Higher scores indicate stronger perceived social inclusion. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was 0.887.
Cognitive flexibility
Cognitive flexibility was assessed using five items adapted from the Cognitive Flexibility Inventory [45]. These items measured participants’ ability to adapt strategies, think critically, and handle dynamic changes in sports contexts. A sample item is: “I consider multiple options before making a decision.” Higher scores reflect greater cognitive flexibility. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was 0.819.
Analytical strategy
The study employed a two-step structural equation modeling (SEM) approach using SmartPLS 4.0 to analyze the hypothesized relationships. In the first step, the measurement model was assessed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the latent constructs, including convergent validity (via average variance extracted), internal consistency (via Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability), and discriminant validity (via Fornell-Larcker criterion and HTMT ratios). In the second step, the structural model was tested to examine the direct and indirect effects among variables, including the mediating roles of emotional resilience and empathy development. Bootstrapping with 5,000 resamples was used to assess the significance of path coefficients and mediation effects. Control variables such as age, gender, education level, and socioeconomic status were included in the model to account for potential confounding influences. This approach ensured a rigorous evaluation of both measurement quality and the theoretical pathways proposed in the conceptual framework.
Results
Measurement model
Table 2 presents the validity and reliability results for the constructs in the study. For adaptive sports programs, the average variance extracted is 0.504, composite reliability is 0.889, and Cronbach’s alpha is 0.856, indicating satisfactory reliability and convergent validity. The item loadings range from 0.512 to 0.800, with all loadings exceeding the minimum threshold of 0.50. Emotional resilience demonstrates an average variance extracted of 0.516, composite reliability of 0.841, and Cronbach’s alpha of 0.769, with item loadings between 0.640 and 0.805, showing acceptable reliability and convergent validity. For empathy development, the average variance extracted is 0.500, composite reliability is 0.828, and Cronbach’s alpha is 0.761. The item loadings range from 0.565 to 0.768, indicating adequate reliability, though one item (ED3) has a slightly lower loading. Social inclusion shows strong reliability and validity, with an average variance extracted of 0.600, composite reliability of 0.912, and Cronbach’s alpha of 0.887. The item loadings range from 0.655 to 0.843, with all values well above the acceptable threshold. Finally, cognitive flexibility has an average variance extracted of 0.584, composite reliability of 0.874, and Cronbach’s alpha of 0.819, with item loadings between 0.660 and 0.830, indicating robust reliability and convergent validity for this construct. Overall, the results suggest that all constructs meet the criteria for validity and reliability, supporting their use in the study.
Table 2.
Validity and reliability for constructs
| Loadings | AVE | CR | Cronbach’s Alpha | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adaptive sports programs | 0.504 | 0.889 | 0.856 | |
| ASP1 | 0.512 | |||
| ASP2 | 0.696 | |||
| ASP3 | 0.702 | |||
| ASP4 | 0.770 | |||
| ASP5 | 0.800 | |||
| ASP6 | 0.757 | |||
| ASP7 | 0.759 | |||
| ASP8 | 0.638 | |||
| Emotional resilience | 0.516 | 0.841 | 0.769 | |
| ER1 | 0.722 | |||
| ER2 | 0.689 | |||
| ER3 | 0.640 | |||
| ER4 | 0.726 | |||
| ER5 | 0.805 | |||
| Empathy development | 0.500 | 0.828 | 0.761 | |
| ED1 | 0.676 | |||
| ED2 | 0.748 | |||
| ED3 | 0.565 | |||
| ED4 | 0.768 | |||
| ED5 | 0.736 | |||
| Social inclusion | 0.600 | 0.912 | 0.887 | |
| SI1 | 0.690 | |||
| SI2 | 0.805 | |||
| SI3 | 0.655 | |||
| SI4 | 0.749 | |||
| SI5 | 0.820 | |||
| SI6 | 0.837 | |||
| SI7 | 0.843 | |||
| Cognitive flexibility | 0.584 | 0.874 | 0.819 | |
| CF1 | 0.700 | |||
| CF2 | 0.826 | |||
| CF3 | 0.788 | |||
| CF4 | 0.830 | |||
| CF5 | 0.660 |
The Fornell-Larcker criterion and the HTMT criterion are presented to assess the discriminant validity of the constructs. In the Fornell-Larcker criterion, the square roots of the average variance extracted values (diagonal values) are compared with the correlations between constructs (off-diagonal values). For adaptive sports programs, the square root of the average variance extracted is 0.710, which is greater than its correlations with cognitive flexibility (0.672), emotional resilience (0.359), empathy development (0.520), and social inclusion (0.736). Similarly, cognitive flexibility, emotional resilience, empathy development, and social inclusion all exhibit square roots of average variance extracted that are higher than their respective correlations with other constructs, confirming discriminant validity (Table 3).
Table 3.
Fornell-Larcker criterion
| ASP | CF | ER | ED | SI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ASP | 0.710 | ||||
| CF | 0.672 | 0.764 | |||
| ER | 0.359 | 0.481 | 0.718 | ||
| ED | 0.520 | 0.679 | 0.361 | 0.702 | |
| SI | 0.736 | 0.745 | 0.442 | 0.599 | 0.774 |
The HTMT criterion further validates discriminant validity by assessing the heterotrait-monotrait ratios of correlations. All HTMT values are below the commonly accepted threshold of 0.85, with a few exceptions approaching the threshold, such as the relationship between adaptive sports programs and social inclusion (0.828), cognitive flexibility and social inclusion (0.873), and empathy development and cognitive flexibility (0.780). These results indicate that the constructs are sufficiently distinct from one another, supporting the overall discriminant validity of the model (Table 4).
Table 4.
HTMT criterion
| ASP | CF | ER | ED | SI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ASP | |||||
| CF | 0.796 | ||||
| ER | 0.419 | 0.592 | |||
| ED | 0.561 | 0.780 | 0.416 | ||
| SI | 0.828 | 0.873 | 0.515 | 0.608 |
Structural model
Table 5 presents the effects of the hypothesized relationships and control variables on the endogenous variables in the study. For the control variables, age, gender, education level, and socioeconomic status, none of the relationships with the dependent variables were statistically significant (p > 0.05). This indicates that these demographic factors did not significantly influence the key outcomes in this study.
Table 5.
Effects on endogenous variables
| Hypotheses | β | CI (5%, 95%) | SE | t-value | p-value | Decision | f2 | R 2 | Q2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age1 | 0.052(n.s.) | (-0.030, 0.074) | 0.072 | 0.722 | 0.226 | ||||
| Gender2 | 0.078(n.s.) | (-0.020, 0.140) | 0.059 | 1.322 | 0.092 | ||||
| Education Level3 | 0.041(n.s.) | (-0.042, 0.090) | 0.054 | 0.759 | 0.274 | ||||
| Socioeconomic Status4 | 0.039(n.s.) | (-0.029, 0.058) | 0.048 | 0.812 | 0.291 | ||||
| H1a ASP ◊ ER | 0.359*** | (0.248, 0.479) | 0.061 | 5.936 | 0.000 | Supported | 0.148 | 0.129 | 0.302 |
| H1b ASP ◊ ED | 0.520*** | (0.459, 0.592) | 0.036 | 14.341 | 0.000 | Supported | 0.371 | 0.271 | 0.434 |
| H2a ER ◊ SI | 0.152*** | (0.076, 0.233) | 0.040 | 3.769 | 0.000 | Supported | 0.051 | 0.625 | 0.353 |
| H2b ED ◊ SI | 0.259*** | (0.177, 0.324) | 0.038 | 6.819 | 0.000 | Supported | 0.125 | ||
| H3a ER ◊ CF | 0.195*** | (0.094, 0.291) | 0.050 | 3.864 | 0.000 | Supported | 0.085 | 0.631 | 0.374 |
| H3b ED ◊ CF | 0.405*** | (0.335, 0.480) | 0.038 | 10.596 | 0.000 | Supported | 0.309 | ||
| H4a ASP ◊ ER ◊ SI | 0.055*** | (0.024, 0.096) | 0.019 | 2.864 | 0.004 | Supported | |||
| H4b ASP ◊ ER ◊ CF | 0.070*** | (0.028, 0.132) | 0.026 | 2.719 | 0.007 | Supported | |||
| H5a ASP ◊ ED ◊ SI | 0.135*** | (0.090, 0.173) | 0.020 | 6.663 | 0.000 | Supported | |||
| H5b ASP ◊ ED ◊ CF | 0.211*** | (0.177, 0.249) | 0.019 | 10.831 | 0.000 | Supported |
For the hypothesized relationships, adaptive sports programs were found to have a significant positive effect on emotional resilience (β = 0.359, p < 0.001, CI= {0.248, 0.479}) and empathy development (β = 0.520, p < 0.001, {0.459, 0.592}). Both hypotheses H1a and H1b were supported. Emotional resilience was found to significantly predict social inclusion (β = 0.152, p < 0.001, {0.076, 0.233}) and cognitive flexibility (β = 0.195, p < 0.001, {0.094, 0.291}), supporting hypotheses H2a and H3a. Empathy development also significantly predicted social inclusion (β = 0.259, p < 0.001, {0.177, 0.324}) and cognitive flexibility (β = 0.405, p < 0.001, {0.335, 0.480}), supporting hypotheses H2b and H3b.
For the indirect effects, adaptive sports programs were shown to positively influence social inclusion via emotional resilience (β = 0.055, p = 0.004, {0.024, 0.096}) and cognitive flexibility via emotional resilience (β = 0.070, p = 0.007, {0.028, 0.132}), supporting hypotheses H4a and H4b. Similarly, adaptive sports programs significantly influenced social inclusion via empathy development (β = 0.135, p < 0.001, {0.090, 0.173}) and cognitive flexibility via empathy development (β = 0.211, p < 0.001, {0.177, 0.249}), supporting hypotheses H5a and H5b.
The effect sizes (f2) indicate moderate to strong impacts for some key paths, such as adaptive sports programs on empathy development (f2 = 0.371) and empathy development on cognitive flexibility (f2 = 0.309). The R2 values show the amount of variance explained in each dependent variable, with emotional resilience (R2 = 0.129), empathy development (R2 = 0.271), social inclusion (R2 = 0.625), and cognitive flexibility (R2 = 0.631) all demonstrating substantial explained variance. The predictive relevance (Q2) values further validate the model’s explanatory power, as all Q2 values are above zero, indicating strong predictive validity for the endogenous variables. Figures 2 and 3 show the structural paths and bootstrapping outcomes.
Fig. 2.
Structural model
Fig. 3.
Bias-corrected and accelerated (BCa) bootstrapping
Overall, the results confirm the significant role of adaptive sports programs in fostering emotional resilience and empathy development, which in turn enhance social inclusion and cognitive flexibility. These findings highlight the importance of mediating mechanisms in understanding the broader impact of adaptive sports programs.
Table 6 presents the Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI) for the model, calculated as the square root of the product of the average variance extracted (0.541) and the average R-squared value (0.414), resulting in a GFI of 0.473. This value represents the overall model fit, indicating how well the model explains the data. The GFI aligns with Cohen’s (2013) recommendations for effect size interpretation in complex behavioral models. Considering the high R² values and strong theoretical alignment, the GFI is deemed acceptable and reflective of the model’s explanatory adequacy [41].
Table 6.
Goodness-of-Fit index (GFI)
| Constructs | AVE | R 2 |
|---|---|---|
| ASP | 0.504 | |
| ER | 0.516 | 0.129 |
| ED | 0.500 | 0.271 |
| SI | 0.600 | 0.625 |
| CF | 0.584 | 0.631 |
| Average scores | 0.541 | 0.414 |
(GFI =
 ) |
0.473 |
Discussion and conclusion
This study aimed to investigate the impact of adaptive sports programs on social inclusion and cognitive flexibility, with emotional resilience and empathy development serving as mediators. The findings revealed that adaptive sports programs significantly enhance both emotional resilience and empathy development, which in turn positively influence social inclusion and cognitive flexibility. These results highlight the transformative potential of adaptive sports programs in fostering personal and social growth by providing structured environments that promote resilience and empathy among participants. The structured and collaborative nature of adaptive sports appears to be a key driver in these outcomes, offering participants repeated exposure to social interactions, emotional challenges, and role negotiation—conditions known to cultivate adaptive emotional and cognitive responses. By demonstrating the mediating roles of emotional resilience and empathy development, the study bridges critical gaps in understanding how adaptive sports programs translate into broader psychosocial and cognitive benefits. This mediational pathway suggests that adaptive sports function not merely as physical interventions but as dynamic social systems where participants continuously invest and recover emotional and interpersonal resources, aligning with Conservation of Resources (COR) Theory. This contributes to the growing body of literature on inclusive sports and offers practical insights for educators and policymakers seeking to create impactful, inclusive interventions in physical education settings.
Research implications
This study significantly enhances the theoretical understanding of how adaptive sports programs influence psychosocial and cognitive outcomes, particularly through the mediating roles of emotional resilience and empathy development. Grounded in the Conservation of Resources (COR) Theory [35], this research provides a deeper understanding of how adaptive sports programs serve as resource-enriching environments that help participants develop critical emotional and social resources. COR theory posits that individuals strive to acquire, protect, and invest resources to cope with challenges, and participation in adaptive sports programs facilitates the accumulation of psychological resources, such as emotional resilience and empathy, which further enable individuals to achieve social and cognitive outcomes. By empirically validating these relationships, the study extends the application of COR theory within the domain of physical education and psychosocial development, offering a comprehensive view of the mechanisms through which structured sports interventions promote personal growth. This aligns with recent findings that highlight the multifaceted benefits of adaptive sports in fostering personal development and social integration among individuals with disabilities [2, 46].
The incorporation of emotional resilience as a mediator provides deeper insights into how adaptive sports programs enable participants to effectively navigate adversity, thereby enhancing their capacity for social inclusion and cognitive flexibility. This perspective aligns with COR theory, as emotional resilience functions as a protective resource that helps individuals mitigate stress, regulate emotions, and engage meaningfully in social and cognitive processes. Studies emphasizing the role of resilience in achieving positive psychosocial outcomes further support this relationship [13, 47, 48]. Similarly, the focus on empathy development elucidates the processes through which inclusive sports environments cultivate interpersonal understanding and social cohesion. COR theory suggests that empathy acts as an interpersonal resource that facilitates social connectedness and adaptive cognitive functioning. This resonates with prior research emphasizing the role of empathy in promoting social integration and flexible thinking [49, 50].
Furthermore, this study contributes to the literature on inclusivity and personal development by empirically demonstrating the interconnectedness of adaptive sports participation, emotional resilience, empathy development, social inclusion, and cognitive flexibility. By integrating COR theory into the analysis, the research provides a nuanced understanding of how adaptive sports programs serve as catalysts for holistic personal growth, enabling individuals to acquire the emotional and social resources needed to thrive. This reinforces the notion that such programs are instrumental in empowering individuals and fostering inclusive communities [51].
In summary, this research enriches existing theoretical models by demonstrating how adaptive sports programs facilitate psychosocial and cognitive development through the lens of COR theory. By illustrating the pathways through which emotional resilience and empathy mediate these relationships, the study advances theoretical frameworks within physical education, psychology, and disability studies, while providing a foundation for future research exploring resource-based interventions in inclusive settings.
The findings of this study hold significant practical implications for educators, program designers, and policymakers aiming to promote inclusivity and personal development through adaptive sports programs. By demonstrating the positive effects of these programs on social inclusion and cognitive flexibility, the research highlights the value of incorporating structured and inclusive physical activities into educational curricula and community initiatives. Adaptive sports programs provide a platform for individuals of diverse abilities to engage meaningfully, fostering a sense of belonging and enhancing their ability to adapt and think critically in dynamic situations. Policymakers can use these insights to allocate resources for expanding access to such programs, ensuring that more individuals can benefit from their transformative potential.
For educators and sports practitioners, the study underscores the importance of fostering environments that cultivate emotional resilience and empathy development. Training coaches and facilitators to implement strategies that encourage participants to overcome challenges and empathize with others can amplify the impact of these programs. Practical measures, such as team-based activities, peer mentoring, and reflective practices, can be integrated into program designs to reinforce these outcomes. Additionally, community organizations and institutions can leverage the findings to design inclusive sports events and activities that actively promote social cohesion and personal growth, contributing to the broader societal goal of inclusivity.
Ultimately, this study serves as a guide for stakeholders in the adaptive sports domain to optimize program outcomes and address the psychosocial and cognitive needs of participants. By emphasizing the pathways through which adaptive sports programs achieve their impact, the research offers actionable strategies for creating inclusive and empowering environments, benefiting not only individuals with diverse abilities but also the communities in which they participate.
Limitations
This study, while providing valuable insights into the impact of adaptive sports programs on psychosocial and cognitive outcomes, has certain limitations. The use of a convenience sampling method may limit the generalizability of the findings to broader populations. Although the study proposes directional pathways based on Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, the cross-sectional nature of the design limits causal interpretation. While our model suggests that adaptive sports programs enhance emotional resilience and empathy, which in turn promote social inclusion and cognitive flexibility, these relationships may be reciprocal or influenced by unmeasured third variables. Longitudinal or intervention-based studies are needed to establish temporal precedence and further validate the directional assumptions proposed in this model.
Besides, the study primarily focuses on participants from specific educational and community settings, which may not fully capture the diversity of adaptive sports contexts. Future research could explore these dynamics across different cultural and institutional environments to enhance the applicability of the findings. Despite these limitations, the study establishes a strong foundation for further exploration of adaptive sports programs and their role in fostering inclusivity and personal development.
Last but not the least, it is important to note that the construct of adaptive sports programs (ASPs) was operationalized through participant perceptions rather than objective program design features. While this approach captures subjective experiences related to inclusivity, collaboration, safety, and skill development, it may also reflect respondents’ positive engagement with the program, potentially inflating associations with psychosocial outcomes such as resilience and empathy. ASPs inherently vary in structure, goals, coaching methods, and participant demographics, and this heterogeneity was not directly captured in the present study. Furthermore, the possibility of self-selection bias cannot be ruled out—individuals predisposed to resilience or social-emotional engagement may be more likely to join or benefit from certain programs. Future research could address this by comparing different types of adaptive sports programs and incorporating observational or qualitative data on program design and delivery. Developing multi-dimensional scales that integrate both participant experience and objective program characteristics would enhance the precision and generalizability of findings.
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Author contributions
JS conceived and designed the study, drafted the manuscript, and performed the data analysis. ZC conducted the data collection and drafted the manuscript. YB conceived and designed the study, reviewed the manuscript, and suggested improvements. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Funding
This work was supported by the 2023 Scientific Research Program for Higher Education Institutions in Anhui Province, Research on the Promotion System of Extracurricular Physical Exercise for Youth in Anhui Province under the Perspective of “Home-School-Society” Collaboration [Project Number: 2023AH051076]; and the 2024 “Four New” Research and Reform Practice Project, Practice and Research of Badminton Teaching Mode in Colleges and Universities Based on Intelligent Video Feedback System [Project Number: 2023sx033].
Data availability
The datasets used in this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of the School of Physical Education, Liaoning Normal University. Informed consent to participate was obtained from all of the participants in the study.
Consent for publication
Not required.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Footnotes
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- 1.Lape EC, Katz JN, Losina E, Kerman HM, Gedman MA, Blauwet CA. Participant-reported benefits of involvement in an adaptive sports program: a qualitative study. Pm&r. 2018;10(5):507–515. 10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.10.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 2.Diaz R, Miller EK, Kraus E, Fredericson M. Impact of adaptive sports participation on quality of life. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2019;27(2):73–82. 10.1097/JSA.0000000000000242 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Erdyneeva KG, Schetinina SY, Makarov AL, Sokolova NL, Rozhnova TM, Krokhina JA. (2021). Sports in life of students with disabilities: individual trajectories of physical abilities development, 16, pp. 1985–92. 10.14198/jhse.2021.16.Proc4.45
- 4.Jeanes R, Spaaij R, Magee J, Farquharson K, Gorman S, Lusher D. Developing participation opportunities for young people with disabilities? Policy enactment and social inclusion in Australian junior sport. The potential of community sport for social inclusion. Routledge; 2022;107–25.
- 5.Yongtawee A, Park J, Kim Y, Woo M. Athletes have different dominant cognitive functions depending on type of sport. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2022;20(1):1–15. 10.1080/1612197X.2021.1956570 [Google Scholar]
- 6.Zhang Y, Tsai SB. Application of adaptive virtual reality with AI-enabled techniques in modern sports training. Mob Inf Syst. 2021;2021(1):6067678. 10.1155/2021/6067678 [Google Scholar]
- 7.Mohammadi S. Social inclusion of newly arrived female asylum seekers and refugees through a community sport initiative: the case of bike Bridge. The potential of community sport for social inclusion. Routledge; 2022;205–22.
- 8.Sakalidis KE, Fadeeva A, Hettinga FJ, Ling FCM. The role of the social environment in inclusive sports participation—Identifying similarities and challenges in athletes with and without intellectual disabilities through coaches’ eyes: a qualitative inquiry. PLoS ONE. 2023;18(1):e0280379. 10.1371/journal.pone.0280379 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Shima T, Tai K, Nakao H, Shimofure T, Arai Y, Kiyama K, Onizawa Y. Association between self-reported empathy and sport experience in young adults. J Phys Educ Sport. 2021;21(1):66–72. 10.7752/jpes.2021.01009 [Google Scholar]
- 10.Ballas J, Buultjens M, Murphy G, Jackson M. Elite-level athletes with physical impairments: barriers and facilitators to sport participation. Disabil Soc. 2022;37(6):1018–37. 10.1080/09687599.2020.1862642 [Google Scholar]
- 11.Orr K, Wright FV, Grassmann V, McPherson AC, Faulkner GE, Arbour-Nicitopoulos KP. Children and youth with impairments in social skills and cognition in out-of-school time inclusive physical activity programs: a scoping review. Int J Dev Disabil. 2021;67(2):79–93. 10.1080/20473869.2019.1603731 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Marheni E, Afrizal S, Purnomo E, Jermaina N, Cahyani FI. Integrating emotional intelligence and mental education in sports to improve personal resilience of adolescents. Retos. 2024;51:649–56. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=9142090 [Google Scholar]
- 13.Den Hartigh RJ, Meerhoff LRA, Van Yperen NW, Neumann ND, Brauers JJ, Frencken WG, Brink MS. Resilience in sports: a multidisciplinary, dynamic, and personalized perspective. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol. 2024;17(1):564–86. 10.1080/1750984X.2022.2039749 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Junnarkar M, Sahni SP, Gill S. Resilience and well-being in sports. Emotion, Well-Being, and resilience. Apple Academic; 2021;267–80.
- 15.Mladenović M, Stojanović N, Stojanović D, Živković M, Aleksić D, Tešanović G, Momčilović V. Emotional reactivity and emotion regulation among young adults during COVID-19 lockdown: the moderating role of gender and engagement in sports. Front Psychol. 2021;12:774732. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.774732 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Zhang R, Khatibi A, Tham J. Educational strategies for enhancing college students’ sports awareness and behaviour: a study on health outcomes. Rev Psicol Deporte. 2023;32(3):366–73. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Duan X, Wang X, Li X, Li S, Zhong Y, Bu T. Effect of mass sports activity on prosocial behavior: a sequential mediation model of flow trait and subjective wellbeing. Front Public Health. 2022;10:960870. 10.3389/fpubh.2022.960870 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Ocampo R. Recognizing risks and building on resilience. In: The Influence and Psychology of American Football Coaches Upon Adolescents: The Warrior Mentality. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2024;97–210. 10.1007/978-3-031-69320-5_5
- 19.Wagstaff CR, Sarkar M, Davidson CL, Fletcher D. Resilience in sport: a critical review of psychological processes, Sociocultural influences, and organizational dynamics.In Wagstaff CRD, editor. The organizational psychology of sport: Key issues and practical applications.. London: Routledge; 2016. p. 138-68. 10.4324/9781315666532
- 20.Shi Y, Wang Z, Lipowski M. Integrating school physical education into adolescent resilience education in the context of integration of sports and education in the new era: a literature review study. US-China Educ Rev. 2024;14(8):505–19. 10.17265/2161-623X/2024.08.002 [Google Scholar]
- 21.Davis MH. Measuring individual differences in empathy: evidence for a multidimensional approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1983;44(1):113. 10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113 [Google Scholar]
- 22.Hovdal DOG, Haugen T, Larsen IB, Johansen BT. Students’ experiences and learning of social inclusion in team activities in physical education. Eur Phys Educ Rev. 2021;27(4):889–907. 10.1177/1356336X211002855 [Google Scholar]
- 23.Ruiz-Montero PJ, Corral-Robles S, Garcia-Carmona M, Leiva-Olivencia JJ. Development of prosocial competencies in PETE and sport science students. Social justice, service-learning, and physical activity in cultural diversity contexts. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy. 2023;28(3):244–58. 10.1080/17408989.2021.1976740 [Google Scholar]
- 24.Li J, Shao W. Influence of sports activities on prosocial behavior of children and adolescents: a systematic literature review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(11):6484. 10.3390/ijerph19116484 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Amiel NY. The role of team sports in fostering inclusivity and empathy among diverse student groups. CrossCult Manag J. 2023; 25(2):87–92.
- 26.Aronen A, Kokkonen M, Hintsa T. Association of emotional intelligence with resilience and work engagement in sports coaches. J Phys Educ Sport. 2021;21(6). 10.7752/jpes.2021.06462
- 27.Li J, Jiang X, Zhou Y. Culture, emotion, and cognition: understanding the psychological dynamics of Chinese sports with emotional regulation skills and cognitive reappraisal. Heliyon. 2024;10(14). https://www.cell.com/heliyon/fulltext/S2405-8440(24)10337-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 28.Kaçay Z, Güngör NB, Soyer F. The mediating role of cognitive flexibility in the effect of empathic tendency on teacher professionalism. Int J Psychol Educ Stud. 2021;8(1):124–34. 10.17220/ijpes.2021.8.1.167 [Google Scholar]
- 29.Cai Z, Qi B. Cognitive flexibility as a protective factor for empathy. Front Psychol. 2023;13:1064494. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1064494 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Kara NS, Soyer F, Koç M. Examination of meaning in life, forgiveness flexibility, cognitive flexibility, and psychological symptoms in individuals doing sports and not doing sports in terms of various variables. Afr Educ Res J. 2021;9(1):146–59. [Google Scholar]
- 31.Sugden JT, Schulenkorf N, Adair D, Frawley S. The role of sport in reflecting and shaping group dynamics: the intergroup relations continuum and its application to Fijian rugby and soccer. Sport Manag Rev. 2020;23(2):271–83. 10.1016/j.smr.2019.02.001 [Google Scholar]
- 32.Balçıkanlı GS, İlhan EL, Esentürk OK, Çelik OB. The prosocial-antisocial behavior and empathic skill levels of wheelchair basketball players in sports. Int J Disabil Sport Health Sci. 2019;2(1):1–11. 10.33438/ijdshs.547485 [Google Scholar]
- 33.Bahmani DS, Razazian N, Motl RW, Farnia V, Alikhani M, Pühse U, Brand S. Physical activity interventions can improve emotion regulation and dimensions of empathy in persons with multiple sclerosis: an exploratory study. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2020;37:101380. 10.1016/j.msard.2019.101380 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Baumeister RF, Leary MR. The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol Bull. 1995;117(3):497-529. 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497 [PubMed]
- 35.Hobfoll SE. Conservation of resources: a new attempt at conceptualizing stress. Am Psychol. 1989;44(3):513. https://psycnet.apa.org/buy/1989-29399-001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Golestanibakht T, Babaie E, Mostaed Hesari S. The effects of positive psychology training on wisdom, resilience, and cognitive flexibility of students. Posit Psychol Res. 2022;8(2):83–100. 10.22108/ppls.2022.131504.2225 [Google Scholar]
- 37.Kara NŞ, Cetın M, Dönmez A, Çağın M. The relationship between cognitive flexibility and the meaning of life: a research on the students of the faculty of sport sciences. Turk J Sport Exerc. 2020;22(1):142–9. 10.15314/tsed.656672 [Google Scholar]
- 38.Gardner M. Correlating cognitive flexibility and mental toughness while examining the connection between failure, flexibility, and change within Spartan obstacle course racers. Calif Univ Pa. 2018.
- 39.Certel Z, Bahadır Z, Kabaca E, Seraki S. Professional experience, tolerance, empathy, and reading interests as variables predicting cognitive flexibilities of physical education teachers. Int J New Trends Educ Implic. 2018;9(3):41–51. [Google Scholar]
- 40.Hair JF, Risher JJ, Sarstedt M, Ringle CM. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur Bus Rev. 2019;31(1):2–24. 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203 [Google Scholar]
- 41.Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge. 2013. 10.4324/9780203771587 [Google Scholar]
- 42.Martin JJ. Psychosocial aspects of youth disability sport. Adapt Phys Act Q. 2006;23(1):65–77. 10.1123/apaq.23.1.65 [Google Scholar]
- 43.Riemer HA, Chelladurai P. Development of the athlete satisfaction questionnaire (ASQ). J Sport Exerc Psychol. 1998;20(2):127–56. 10.1123/jsep.20.2.127 [Google Scholar]
- 44.Connor KM, Davidson JR. Development of a new resilience scale: the Connor-Davidson resilience scale (CD‐RISC). Depress Anxiety. 2003;18(2):76–82. 10.1002/da.10113 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Dennis JP, Vander Wal JS. The cognitive flexibility inventory: instrument development and estimates of reliability and validity. Cogn Ther Res. 2010;34:241–53. 10.1007/s10608-009-9276-4 [Google Scholar]
- 46.Pearsall CN. The relationship of adaptive sport participation on sense of community and community integration. East Carolina Univ. 2019.
- 47.Fletcher D. Psychological resilience and adversarial growth in sport and performance. Oxf Res Encycl Psychol. 2018. 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.158 [Google Scholar]
- 48.Morgan PB, Fletcher D, Sarkar M. Developing team resilience: a season-long study of psychosocial enablers and strategies in a high-level sports team. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2019;45:101543. 10.1016/j.psychsport.2019.101543 [Google Scholar]
- 49.Sevdalis V, Raab M. Empathy in sports, exercise, and the performing arts. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2014;15(2):173–9. 10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.10.013 [Google Scholar]
- 50.Sezen-Balçikanli G, Sezen M. Professional sports and empathy: relationship between professional futsal players’ tendency toward empathy and fouls. Phys Cult Sport Stud Res. 2017;73(1):27–35. 10.1515/pcssr-2017-0003 [Google Scholar]
- 51.Alhumaid MM, Adnan Y, Said MA, Alobaid MA, Khoo S. Empowerment and social inclusion through Para sports: a qualitative study on women with physical impairments in Saudi Arabia. Front Psychol. 2024;15:1366694. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1366694 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The datasets used in this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.