Exploring Cultural Bias in Two Different Motor Competence Test Batteries When Used in African Children

Bouwien Smits-Engelsman, Evi Verbecque, Marisja Denysschen and Dané Coetzee
Additional contact information
Bouwien Smits-Engelsman: Department of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Cape Town, Cape Town 7925, South Africa
Evi Verbecque: Rehabilitation Research Centre (REVAL), Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, Hasselt University, Agoralaan Building A, 3590 Diepenbeek, Belgium
Marisja Denysschen: Physical Activity, Sport and Recreation, Faculty Health Sciences, North-West University, Potchefstroom 2520, South Africa
Dané Coetzee: Physical Activity, Sport and Recreation, Faculty Health Sciences, North-West University, Potchefstroom 2520, South Africa

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 11, 1-13

Abstract: Both the Movement Assessment Battery for Children second edition (M-ABC-2) and Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency second edition short form (BOT-2-SF) are frequently used in research and in the clinical practice to evaluate motor competence in children. Despite its widespread use in research, no studies have reported the results of case identification in African children. Comparing these two motor assessment tools for a different target group is important in order to select the most appropriate clinical and research tool. Methods. A total of 444 children performed MABC-2, 165 children also performed the BOT-2-SF and subsamples were tested on specific subtests of the BOT-2 (Running and Agility, Balance, and Strength). Tests were administered to randomly selected children between 6 and 10 years of age. Results: 36% for the children scored at or below the 16th percentile of the MABC-2, while this was 43%, 27%, and 23% for the component score in Manual Dexterity, Aiming and Catching, and Balance, respectively. Of the children 16% scored at or below the 17th percentile of the BOT-2-SF total score, while this was 3%, 9% and 22% for the subtest scores Running and agility, Balance, and Strength, respectively. A moderate correlation (r = 0.44) was found between total scores of the two tests. No significant correlations were found between the dynamic MABC-2 item (Jumping/Hopping) standard scores and any of the 9 balance items of the BOT-2. Conclusion: Far more children scored in the clinical “at risk” range (<16th percentile) when tested with the MABC-2 than with the BOT-2-SF. Overall, these children seemed not to be limited in motor performance measured by the BOT-2-SF, Running and Agility, and Balance. South African children did show lower levels of strength and explosive power. Children from different cultures will need tests for the specific motor skills that are representative for optimal functioning in their own setting. Thus, adapting reference norms and cut-off values may not be the optimal solution.

Keywords: motor competence; African children; assessment; validity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/11/6788/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/11/6788/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:11:p:6788-:d:830069

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().