Skip to main content

Table 3 Characteristics of physical literacy and related affective, physical and affective domain assessments

From: Assessments Related to the Physical, Affective and Cognitive Domains of Physical Literacy Amongst Children Aged 7–11.9 Years: A Systematic Review

Assessment, country of origin, author(s) of primary study [citation], related studies [citation(s)] Participant n, sex (% female) (age range; mean age) Purpose/ use of assessment Constructs assessed Scale Scoring
Explicit physical literacy assessments
 Longmuir et al. [7077, 80]
N = 963
55% (8–10; 10.1 ± 1.17)
Assess physical literacy CAMSA
PACER (10m or 25m)
Isometric plank hold
Motivation and confidence are measured by a 12 items questionnaire that aggregate to four subscales (adequacy, predilection, intrinsic motivation competence)
Knowledge and understanding are measured via 5 item s (PA guidelines, cardiorespiratory fitness definition, muscular endurance definition, PA comprehension, improve sport skill) questionnaire
Daily behaviour is measured via self-report questionnaire and pedometer step counts
Scores from domains are summed to create a CAPL-2 total score out of 100, which is used to classify the children into one of four interpretative categories (beginning, progressing, achieving or excelling) based on age and sex specific cut points.
CAMSA, PACER and Plank are combined within the physical domain, which is worth 30 points. For motivation and confidence 7.5 points are assigned to each three-item component (intrinsic motivation, PA competence, adequacy, predilection) of the assessment, wherein participants respond to bipolar statements “What’s most like me” selecting if it’s “really true for me” or “sort of true for me” (30 points in total). Daily physical activity behaviour as assessed by self-report and daily pedometer step count (30 points) and knowledge and understanding (10 points). The knowledge and understanding component include four questionnaire items and a missing word paragraph activity.
 Lodewyk et al. [58]
Pilot n = 860
2013–2014 n = 1036
(8–11; NR)
46% (of the 176 that reported sex) approximately 40% completed all measures.
n = 1199
(8–12; NR)
44% (of the 327 who reported sex)
Paper also reported data for ages 12–19 years old
PFL includes three assessments for each of the four components (active participation, fitness, movement and living skills). Aim of the study was to uncover initial validation evidence Measures include student profile, living skill questionnaire (feelings—7 items, thinking—7 items, interacting—7 items)
Active participation questionnaire (22 items across 3 scales of diversity, interests, intentions)
Fitness kills assessed by the Plank Challenge, The Lateral Bound and the Four-Station Circuit
Movement skills assessed by the Run-Stop-Return, Throw and Catch with a Bounce, Advanced Kick
Living skill and active participation questionnaires scored on a 4-point Likert scale
Fitness and Movement skills assessed by teachers using a 4-point scale (1 = emerging, 2 = developing, 3 = acquired, 4 = accomplished) based on detailed descriptions of each in a rubric provided to teachers
 Cairney et al. [78, 79, 165]
N = 215
48% (7–14; NR)
Assess motor competence, comprehension and confidence 18 different movement tasks within five domains that assess different aspects of a child’s movement skills. The five domains are as follows:
object control—upper body
object control—lower body
balance, stability, and body control
Confidence and comprehension is assessed by rater when child is completing motor competence assessment
Children are assessed using a VAS that is 100 mm in length and divided into four categories:
Confidence is rated a low, medium or high
Comprehension is rated as Prompt: If the child needed the assessor to give them an additional prompt (outside of the instructions) (e.g. “Go on. You can do it.”), or to incite them to perform the skill/task, place a tick in the “Prompt” column. Mimic: If the child waited for one of their peers to perform the skill first, place a tick in the “Mimic” column. Describe: If the child asked the assessor to describe the skill/task, place a tick in the “Describe” column. Demo: If the child asked the assessor to demonstrate the skill/task, place a tick in the “Demo” column.
Affective domain
 Cumming et al. [81]
N = 1675
NR (9–12, NR)
Use the 2x2 achievement goal framework to assess goal approach orientations 12 items related to mastery/ego X approach/avoidance goal framework 5-point Likert scale from 1 (not at all true) to 5 (very true)
 Bornholt & Piccolo [8284]
N = 76
43% (4–13.5, 8.1 ± 2.3)
Self-concept in relation to physical movement, natural talent, effort, difficulty, personal identity, and social identity Dot-point rating scores 1 (low) to 5 (high) Scores averaged from (1) low to (5) high
 Jones [85]
N = 223
NR (9–12, NR)
Assess attitudes towards curriculum PE 25 items (13 positive and 12 negative) 5-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5)
 Beyer et al. [86]
N = 362
49% (9–13, 11)
Attitudes towards outdoor play Three scales: Perceived benefit of playing outside 4 items; Extent to which students enjoy unstructured play 3 items; Barriers to outdoor play 5 items “How much do you agree with each statement?” Responses on a 5-point Likert scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree
 Sebire et al. [87]
N = 462
56.9% (7–11; 10.0 ± 0.6)
Assess self-determined motivation for PA and PA psychological need satisfaction in children Self-determined motivation for PA: 12 items, 3 per motivation scale (intrinsic, extrinsic, external). PA psychological need satisfaction: autonomy (6 items), competence (6 items), relatedness (6 items) 5-point Likert scale from 1 (not true for me) to 5 (very true for me).
 Brustad [8890]
N = 81
53% (9–10; 10.4 ± 0.3)
Measurement of attraction to PA Original scale has 25 items (5 subscales with 5 items each), shorter scale has 15 items (5 subscales with 3 items each). Subscales include liking of games and sports, liking of physical exertion and exercise, liking of vigorous PA, peer acceptance in sport and games, importance of exercise Structured alternate. Adapted version used 1 to 4 Likert scale
 Simon & Smoll [87, 91]
N = 992
51% (9–12; NR)
Assess attitudes towards PA 6 scales; social, health and fitness, pursuit of vertigo, aesthetic, catharsis, and aesthetic. Each had 8 items 5-point Likert scale and semantic differential technique with a 0-7 bipolar continuum, with 0 as a neutral reference point. Adjectives at each end of the continuum included good-bad, of no use-useful, not pleasant-pleasant, bitter-sweet, nice-awful, happy-sad, dirty-clean, steady-nervous
 DeBate [94]
N = 932
100% (9–14, NR)
Physical activity commitment 12 items measuring attitudes and feelings towards PA Likert scale 0 (strongly disagree) to 3 (strongly agree)
 Welk et al. [95, 96]
N = 152
53% (9–11; NR)
Assess physical self-perceptions in children 36 items, 6 items for each of the 6 domains (global self-esteem, physical self-worth, sport competence, body attractiveness, physical strength, physical condition) 4 point structured alternate format and standard 4-point Likert scale for comparison
 Chen [97]
N = 435
51% (11–12; 9.9 ± 1.1)
Assess psychological needs, motivational types, and motivational consequences for PA participation outside of school Innate psychological needs (6 items), motivational types (12 items), motivational consequences (6 items) Innate psychological needs, motivational types and motivational behavioural consequences were assessed on a 5-point Likert scale 5 (very like me) to 1 (not like me). Responses to motivational affective consequences included 4 semantic pairs anchored on a 5-point Likert scale with smiley faces
 Shewmake [98]
N = 148
47% (8–10; NR)
Assess student’s enjoyment in PE and exergaming 10 statements relating to enjoyment (7) and perceived exertion (3) 5-point Likert scale, strongly disagree (1) strongly agree (5)
 Gray et al. [87]
N = 112
49.3% (9–12, NR)
Assess energy related behaviours including intake of fruits and vegetables, sugar-sweetened beverages,
processed packaged snacks, and fast food; physical activity; recreational screen time; and associated psychosocial determinants
Questionnaire. Utilised Audience Response System through PowerPoint. 71 items in total. Self-determination (9 questions). Outcome expectations (15 questions). Self-efficacy (20) questions. Habit strength (6 questions). Goal intention (6 questions). Knowledge (6 questions). Social desirability (9 questions). 5-point Likert scale
 Bornholt & Piccolo [83]
N = 56
43% (4–11, 8.0 ± 2.1)
Feelings about physical movements Diagram (stick figures running and catching) researcher reads accompanying paragraph and the child ticks as many words as needed in relation to five general feelings Responses scaled from 1 (low) to 7 (high)
 Rosenkranz et al. [101]
N = 230
51% (9–10; 9.5 ± 0.7)
Assess psychosocial variables as part of a 3-year randomised controlled trial aiming to prevent obesity through an after-school programme 16 items: PA task self-efficacy (1 item), PA barriers self-efficacy (4 items), PA enjoyment (2 items), Perceived opportunity for PA (2 items), Perceived habitual PA (2 items), and perceived parental support (5 items) 3-point scale (e.g. not sure at all- somewhat sure- very sure). Perceived habitual PA scores were assessed using a 2-item screener, averaged and dichotomised a meeting PA guideline or not. Parental support was rated on a 6-point scale (never to daily)
 Hyndman et al. [102]
N = 197
43% (8–12, NR)
Enjoyment of lunchtime play Children completed “expected” (before lunch) and “actual” (after lunch) enjoyment of lunch time play using survey cards with pictorial scale 5-point Likert pictorial scale from very unhappy (1) to very happy (5)
 Dunton et al. [103]
N = 119
48% (9–13, NR)
Affective and feeling states relate to physical activity Positive affect, negative affect, physical feeling states all assessed by 2 items each when prompted through a mobile phone Response options included 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=quite a bit, 3=extremely
 Weiss et al. [87]
N = 155
45% (8–12; 10.2 ± 1.4)
Assess children’s motivational orientation for engagement in PA 27 items, 5 subscales: Challenge (5 items relating to preference for challenging or easy skills), curiosity (4 items relating to desire to participate), mastery (5 items relating to problem solving and mastery attempts), judgement (6 items relating to self-assessment vs teacher assessment), criteria (7 items relating to preference for internal sense of success/failure vs external determined success/failure) Structured alternative scoring 1 (low) to 4 (high). Children indicate if “Sort of true for me” or “really true for me”. Separate scores given for each subscale. High scores indicate more intrinsic motivation
 Nelson et al. [106]
N = 382
46% (10–12; 10.8 ± 0.7)
Measure negative attitudes towards PA All items (8) followed the stem “If I were to be physically active on most days…” 5-point Likert scale from 1 (disagree a lot) to 5 (agree a lot)
 Dishman et al. [107]
N = 2092
53% (10–12, NR)
Assess motives for physical activity Self-efficacy (8 items). Perceived barriers: 3 scales; obstacles (3 items), evaluation (3 items), outcomes (3 items). Motives for PA: 30 items, 5 scales for intrinsic; enjoyment (7 items), competence (7 items) and extrinsic; fitness (5 items), appearance (6 items), social (5 items). Parental support (5 items) All used 4-point order response format apart from perceived parental support, 5 point ordered format. Participants entered all self-administered questionnaire responses into a survey software database on laptop computers
 Moore et al. [108]
N = 564
53% (8–9; 8.7 ± 0.5
Assess the enjoyment of PA 16 bipolar statements starting with the stem “When I am physically active…” 5-point Likert scale 1 (Disagree a lot) to 5 (Agree a lot)
 Perry et al. [109]
N = 131
54% (8–14; 9.9 ± NR)
Assess personal goal setting and decision-making efficacy for PA and food choices 18 items representing children may experiences when attempting to improve PA and eating behaviours 5-point Likert scale from 1 (not sure at all) to 5 (completely sure)
 Nelson et al. [106]
N = 382
46% (10–12; 10.8 ± 0.65)
Measure positive attitudes towards PA All items (8) followed the stem “If I were to be physically active on most days…” 5-point Likert scale from 1 (disagree a lot) to 5 (agree a lot)
 Jago et al. [110]
N = 560
49% (NR, 11.3 ± 0.6)
Assess PA self-efficacy 23 physical activity and 24 sedentary behaviour (3 subscales relating to TV, computer/video game/telephone) items were loaded onto palm pilots. All items start with stem “How sure are you that you have (can)…” Dichotomous options (sure and not sure)
 Saunders et al. [87]
N = 442
NR (10–11; NR)
Assess psychosocial determinants on children’s PA: social influences, self-efficacy, beliefs, and intention Social influences (1 factor), self-efficacy (3 factors; support seeking, barriers, positive alternatives), beliefs (2 factors; social outcomes, PA outcomes) 2-point scale (yes or no)
Physical Activity Self-efficacy, enjoyment, social support
 Liang et al. [113]
N = 457
50% (8–12, 10.3 ± 1.0)
Assess PA self-efficacy, enjoyment, social support 8 item scale used to measure PA self-efficacy. 7 item scale to assess PA enjoyment. 10 items to assess social support for exercise Self-efficacy and enjoyment scales used Likert scale ranging from 1 (Disagree a lot) to 5 (Agree a lot). Social support scale used a 5-point scale 1 (none) to 5 (very often)
 Vlachopoulos et al. [114]
N = 817
50% (11–12; NR)
Assess the revised PLOC for use in PE PLOC scale adapted for PE (19 items), perceived autonomy support (6 items), subjective vitality (unclear how many items) Participants provided their responses on a 1-5 Likert type scale anchored by 1 (totally disagree) 4 (in between) and 7 (totally agree)
 Xiang et al. [115]
N = 116
42% (9–10; NR)
Assess perceptions of the motivational climate of team in terms of matter and performance goals Statement starts with stem “In roadrunners…” followed by 24 items related to perception of motivational climate. 11 mastery focussed and 13 performance focussed items. In original scale (used with older children) 9 mastery and 12 performance items related team… Participants responded in agreement to statements on a 5-point Likert scales from YES (5) to NO (1) (YES, yes? no, NO), scores calculated by an average for each scale. In original scale 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)
 Lakes & Hoyt [87]
N = 112
51% (NR, 4–11)
Assess children’s self-regulatory abilities in physically active context 16 items and three subscales: Cognitive Self-Regulation (6 items, including “control over emotions- uncontrolled emotions”) Bipolar adjectives (e.g. “attentive–inattentive”) are used for each item, and raters were asked to rate the child using a 7-point scale
Self-efficacy scale
 Leary et al. [87]
N = 15 children 68% (NR, 8.2 ± 0.9) Assess self-efficacy in overcoming PA barriers Potentially 12 questions but not reported clearly 5-point Likert scale
 Harter 1982 [87]
N = 2704
NR (8–12, NR)
Assess perceived competence in children 36 items, 5 domain specific sub-scale each with 6 items: scholastic competence, social acceptance, athletic competence, physical appearance, behavioural conduct. One global measure of self-worth Structure alternative format
 Agbuga [87]
N = 15
(8–12, NR)
Trichotomous achievement goal theory in elementary PE 15 items reflecting mastery, performance approach and performance avoidance achievement goals. Each item prefaced “in my PE classes…” 5-point Likert scale (not at all true to very true)
Physical Domain
 España-Romero et al. [87]
N = 58
NR (6–11; NR)
Fitness assessment Pubertal status
Weight and Height
Waist circumference
Skinfold thickness (triceps and subscapular)
Hand grip strength
Standing long jump
4x10m shuttle run test
20m shuttle run test
Individual scores for each test: if the student would not perform the task by selecting a reason: 1=shyness, 2=lack of motivation
Athletic Skills Track (AST)
 Hoeboer et al. [127]
N = 463
NR (6–12; NR)
FMS The tracks consisted of a series of fundamental motor tasks (n = 10) Time taken to complete each track
Bruininks–Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (BOTMP-SF)
 Fransen et al. [130]
N = 2485
47.7% (6–11; 8.5 ± NR)
Motor competence Consists of 4 motor area composites: fine manual control, manual coordination, body coordination, strength and agility Motor skills are quantified based on the results of goal-directed activities. A raw score for item outcome may be a drawing, a number of correct activities performed, a number of seconds to complete a task, and/or a complete/incomplete task. A scoring form is used to convert raw scores into point scores
 Cepero et al. [87, 131, 132]
N = 119
(8–12; 10.4 ± 1.2)
Participant numbers reported inconsistently
Fitness assessment PWC 170 test
6-min run test
Arm pull (or hand grip)
Standing broad jump (or vertical jump)
Bent arm hang
Sit-ups in 30 s
Sit and reach
Plate tapping
Shuttle run (10 × 5 m) (or 50 m sprint)
Flamingo balance
Highest score for each assessment recorded
 Patterson et al. [132134, 160]
N = 84
57% (10–12; NR)
Fitness assessment PACER, One-Mile Run, Walk Test, Body Fat Percentage (Skinfold and Bioelectrical Impedance Analyser (BIA), Body Mass Index, Curl-Up, Trunk Lift, 90° Push-Up, Modified Pull-Up, Flexed Arm Hang, Flexibility , Back-Saver Sit and Reach, Shoulder Stretch, flexibility and PA behaviour Individual scores for each assessment then converted to FITnessGram® classifies fitness levels using discrete zones to allow for more personalised feedback
Golf Swing and Putt skill Assessment
 Barnett et al. [135]
N = 43
NR (6–10; 7.8 ± 1.3)
FMS Skill
Golf Swing
Performance Criteria
Scores for both skills were summed for each child resulting in a potential score range of 0-24
MOBAK-3 test
 Hermann et al. [87, 140]
N = 317
55% (6–7;7.0 ± NR)
Motor skill 10 test items: Throwing/ throwing and catching, bouncing, dribbling, balancing, rolling, rope skipping and moving variably Test items are dichotomously scaled (0 =failed, 1 = passed, both attempts passed = 2 points)
Movement assessment battery for children - 2
 Wagner et al. [87]
N = 323
47% (7–10;9.0 ± NR)
Motor skill The three broad motor skill categories that are assessed are Manual Dexterity, Aiming and Catching, and Balance. Item performance may be a number of points, a number of performance correct or number of errors performed, and number of seconds to complete task
 Ericsson [87]
N = 251
NR (6–8; NR)
Motor skill 9 gross motor tasks measuring two components of motor skills;
Balance/bilateral coordination
Hand eye coordination
Three levels are used for evaluation of motor skills 0, 1 and 2.
 Zuvela [145]
N = 95
49% (NR; 8.1 ± 0.3)
Motor skill Space covering skills
Resistance overcoming skills
Object control skills
The result of the test is the time needed to successfully accomplish four of the tasks
 Myers & Wells [87]
N = 65
59% (5–9; NR)
Gardening movements Gardening motions (bending, carrying, lifting, stretching, watering) For each time interval the observer chooses 1 of the 7 PA codes and 1 of the 9 garden tasks
 Calatayud et al. [87]
N = 24
50% (10–12; 11.0 ± NR)
Balance N/A The point at which the participant touched the line was marked by the examiner and measured manually using a measuring tape
 Rudd et al. [87]
N = 337
NR (6–10; 8.2 ± 1.2)
Confirmatory factor analysis: N = 300
48% (NR; 8.2 ± 1.1)
Stability skills Three postural control tasks were selected (the log roll, rock and back support) Each task completed twice, with tasks broken down into performance components (rock-4, log roll-3, back support 5)
 Ulrich et al. [87]
N = 1460
50% (5–10; 8.4 ± NR)
FMS The TGMD-3 assesses 13 fundamental motor skills, subdivided into two subscales: Locomotor: run, gallop, hop, leap, horizontal jump, slide
Ball Skills: two-handed strike, stationary dribble, catch, kick, overhand throw, underhand roll
Each skill is evaluated on three to five performance criteria, 2- trials summed per skill
0 = if a criterion was not performed
1 = if a criterion was performed
Y Balance Test
 Faigenbaum et al. [87]
N = 188
NR (6.9–12.1; NR)
Balance N/A A total composite score was based on the sum of performance in three directions on both legs
Cognitive domain
 Economos et al. [87]
N = 41
NR, 7.1 ± 0.8)
Assess participation in and knowledge of weight-bearing PA Children given 10 different PA pictures, and 3 coloured placemats with “yes”, “no”, “I don’t know”; “yesterday”, “the day before yesterday”; “good for building bones”, “not good for building bones”, “don’t know” Each correct response scored as 1 and all incorrect scores including “don’t know” responses were scored as 0
 Manios et al. [87]
N = 4171
NR (6–10, NR)
Assess knowledge of diet, food products, and PA before and after 3-year intervention Multiple choice questionnaire NR
  1. NR not reported, PE Physical Education, PA Physical Activity, USA United States of America, UK United Kingdom, CAPL-2 Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy, PFL Passport for Life, AGSYS Achievement Goal scale for Youth Sports, ATCPE Attitudes Towards Curriculum Physical Education, ATOP Attitudes Towards Outdoor play scale, BREQ Adapted Behavioural Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire, CAPA Children’s Attraction to Physical Activity Questionnaire, CATPA Children’s Attitudes Towards Physical Activity, CPAS Commitment to Physical Activity Scale, CY-PSPP Children and Youth Physical Self-Perception Profile, DPAPI Motivational determinants of elementary school students’ participation in physical activity, EnjoyPE Enjoyment in Physical Education, FHC-Q Food Health and Choices Questionnaire, FAPM Feelings About Physical Movement, FMS Fundamental Movement Skills, HOP’N Healthy Opportunities for Physical Activity and Nutrition Evaluation, LEAP Lunchtime Enjoyment of Activity and Play Questionnaire, Momentary Assessment of Affect and Physical feeling states (MAAP);MOSS Motivational Orientation in Sport Scale, NAS Negative Attitudes Towards Physical Activity Scale, PABM Physical Activity Beliefs and Motives, PACES,Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale, PAHFE Physical activity and Healthy Food Efficacy, PAS Positive Attitudes Towards Physical Activity Scale, PASE Physical Activity Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, PASES Physical Activity Self-Efficacy Scale, PLOC in PE,The Revised Perceived Locus of causality in physical Education, PMCS Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire, RCS Response to Challenge Scale, SPPC Self-Perception Profile for Children, TAGM Trichotomous Achievement Goal Model, TEOSQ Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire, ALPHA ALPHA Fitness Battery, AST Athletic Skills Track ½, BOTMP-SF Bruininks–Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, CAMSA Canadian Agility and Movement Skills Assessment, EUROFIT, FG FITNESSGRAM, FGCOMP FG-COMPASS, GSPA Golf Swing and Putt skill Assessment, MOBAK-3 Motorische Basiskompetenzen in der 3, MABC2 Movement assessment battery for children-2, MUGI Motorisk Utveckling som Grund för Inlärning, OP Obstacle Polygon, PARAGON PA Research and Assessment tool for Garden Observation, SMT Slalom Movement Test, SEBT Star Excursion Balance Test, SS Stability skill test, TGMD-3 Test of Gross Motor Development-3, 20MSR The Leger 20m Shuttle Run test, YBT Y Balance Test, BONES PAS Beat Osteoporosis Now-Physical Activity Survey, PHKA Pupil Health Knowledge Assessment