Examining the plumbing: looking

at the inhibitors and enablers of

the trickle down effect

Danya Hodgetts

We want to maintain funding for

the elites, because they, in turn,

provide the inspiration for others.

Brown, 1983

High performance success is not only good for our athletes and our

sense of national pride, it also contributes to other important

Government objectives in areas such as participation, economic

development, health and education.

While Australia's Winning Edge is focused on high performance sport,

the connection this has to grassroots participation is well

established. Participation will continue to be a key focus area for

Australian, state and territory governments.

No causal

relationshipStewart and Nicholson

2004

It is not believed

that elite sport

creates mass

sport per se. Hanstad & Skile 2010

No clear evidence

to support the

existence of a

trickle-down effectDe Bosschera, Sotiriadou &

van Bottenburg 2013

86% of

Qlders said

London 2012

had no effect

on intention

to exercise.

1.4% actually

did more

exerciseHodgetts & Duncan

2013

There is a lack of understanding of

what processes produce what

effects, for which participants, in

what circumstances-

Coalter, 2007, p. 3

Understanding the influence of

particular behaviour settings on

physical activity can help to

optimise interventions in those

settings

- Sallis et al., 1998

Theory of change

• …an explicit theory or model of how an

intervention causes the intended or observed

outcomes

– Rogers, 2008, p. 5

• Makes explicit causal relationships between:

– Intervention’s activities

– Mediating factors that lead to desired outcomes

– Effect of potential confounding factors

– McLeroy et al., 2003

Theory of change

http://w

ww

.theory

ofc

hang

e.o

rg/w

hat-

is-t

heory

-of-

chan

ge/

Image c

redit:

Sid

ney H

arr

is

EVERYBODY!

Any kind of

sport event Everyone

doing more

of everything

Miracle?

Input Process Outcome

Leveraging

- Chalip, 2004

EVERYBODY!

Any kind of

sport event

Participants in the

leveraging group,

becoming more

active

Miracle?

Input Process Outcome

Factors

1. Sport participants

(2x/month and

2x/week)

2. Lapsed sport

participants (1x/yr and

1x/month

Intervention

• National team sporting

success

• Increased participation

frequency (input 1)

• Increasing

participation (input 2)

• Activity switching

Weed, 2009; Weed, 2015

Input Process Outcome

Transtheoretical

model

• Maintenance

• Action

• Preparation

• Contemplation

• Pre-contemplation

Factors

• Personal

• Social

• Information

Intervention

Vancouver

2010 Winter

Olympic Games

Increased intention to

exercise:

• Attitude toward the

behaviour

• Past behaviour

• Perceptions about

the degree to which

others were going to

be more active

Potwarka, 2015

Input Process Outcome

Theory of planned

behaviour:

1. Attitude toward the

behaviour

2. Perceptions about the

behaviour being

difficult/easy to

perform

3. Perceived approval

from others to perfrom

a behaviour

Factors

• Confidence/compete

nce (self efficacy)

• Attitudes and norms

• Stages of

participation

Intervention

London 2012

• Increased sport

participation?

• Hinder, rather

than foster?

• Self-efficacy

theory

• Self determination

theory

• Theory of planned

behaviour

• Transtheoretical

model

Boardley, 2013

Input Process Outcome

Hindson et al., 1994

Carter & Lorenc, 2013

Factors

Individuals

Community

Environment

Intervention

• mass media campaigns

• community participation

• educational events

• advocacy

• environmental changes

• Knowledge of

benefits of

active

lifestyle

• Improved

access to

physical

activity

• Social learning

theory

• Community

organisation

models

Baker et al., 2004

Farquhar et al., 1985

Lefebvre et al., 1987

Whole of community interventions: easier said than done

- Mummery & Brown, 2009

Input Process Outcome

Factors

1. Individual

2. Social

3. Physical environment

4. Policy

• Increasing physical

activity (demonstration

effect)

• Increasing sport

participation (festival

effect)Rowe et al. (2013)

Input Process Outcome

• Social ecological

model

• Community sport

development theory

Intervention

A combination of tactics,

each targeting factors

believed to mediate

changes in physical

activity

Sallis et al., 2004

1. 5 – 17 year olds:

7 hours of

moderate to

vigorous

physical activity

per week

2. 18 – 64 year

olds: 2.5 – 5 hrs

of moderate or

1.25 – 2.5 hrs

vigorous

physical activity

per week

• Increase in

physical

activity

• Frequency

• Intensity

• Time

• Same amount

• No effect

• Activity

switching

• Less physical

activity

• Discourageme

nt effect

Input Process Outcome Long term

Accountability

ceiling

Mediators

Event dimensions

• Multi/single sport

• Spectator / mass

participation

• Local/general

relevance

• Hosting event

• Performance

success

• Event size

• Television factors

• Incidental

physical activity

• Active transport

• Individual

exercise

• Community

exercise program

• Online exercise

program

• Commercial

providers

• Sport clubs

• Social ecological

model

• Community sport

development

theory

Leveraging

1. Individual factors

2. Social factors

3. Physical

environment

factors

4. Policy factors