Young para-athletes display more hedonic well-being than people with disabilities not taking part in competitive sports: insights from a multi-country survey

Hedonic well-being relates to how individuals experience and rate their lives. People with disabilities due to their pathology may more frequently suffer from anxiety and depressive disorders than their able-bodied counterparts. Sports participation is an essential way to cope with disability. On the other hand, compared with their able-bodied peers, para-athletes undergo a unique series of stressors. Little is known in terms of hedonic well-being in this specific population. We present the results of a multi-country survey of self-perceived hedonic well-being by para-athletes of different sports disciplines and a control group (disabled individuals not playing competitive sports), using the "Psychological General Well-Being Index" (PGWBI). We included 1,208 participants, aged 17.39 years, 58.4% male, 41.6% female, and 70.3% para-athletes. Para-athletes exhibited higher well-being than disabled people, for all domains of the PGWBI scale. The nature of disability/impairment was significant, with those with acquired disability reporting lower well-being. Those taking part in wheelchair basketball, para-athletics, and para-swimming competitions had a higher likelihood of reporting well-being, whereas those engaged in wheelchair rugby exhibited lower well-being compared with controls. This large-scale investigation can enable a better understanding of the self-perceived hedonic well-being of disabled people.

Risk perception in Northeast Asia

Multi-country surveys of the public's perception of risk using the same questionnaire were sequentially implemented from April to December 2006 in Japan, China, and South Korea. Statistical analyses, such as traditional mean tests, rank order tests, two-step cluster analysis, and principal component analysis were used to analyze the survey data. The results revealed that Chinese tend to be more tolerant of risk than Japanese and South Koreans. In all three countries, the threats of global warming, cancer, traffic accidents, and fire were perceived as higher-order risks, while infectious diseases and threats from high technology were perceived as lower-order risks. Looking across the entire multi-country sample, we found that Chinese participants perceived greater risk in typhoons, SARS, and drugs; Japanese saw greater risk from gas explosions and potential threats coming over the Internet; while people in all three countries identified earthquakes as a primary risk. These differences in risk perception reflect the natural and socioeconomic conditions in the three countries. Although the study did not emphasize differences in risk perception within countries based on demographic factors such as education, age, and gender, we found that differences based on education and age tended to be greater in China and South Korea than in Japan. We also found that men perceived greater risks than women in China and South Korea, while in Japan it was the opposite with women perceiving greater risks. A comparison of these results with previous studies reveals a bias in past studies toward student samples and indicates the need for more representative samples in multi-country surveys.