Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 2, 2025

Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen
Published on: October 5, 2020
Understanding dual career views of European university athletes: The more than gold project focus groups
Laura Capranica1,2, Mojca Doupona2,3, Ilvis Abelkalns4
1Department of Movement, Human and Health Sciences, University of Rome Foro Italico, Rome, Italy.
Abstract:
Previous studies have found that student-athletes (S-As) have difficulties in achieving dual career (DC) success. However, no studies have analysed the opinion of the S-As on the functioning of DC with a qualitative methodology. The aim of the present work was to collect the opinions of elite university S-As in relation to DC policy adopted by their academic institutions in different European countries. In total, 77 athletes (F = 35, M = 42; age range: 20-25 years) participated in 15 national face-to-face focus groups in five different countries, to discuss aspects that higher education institutes should implement in relation to: 1) the athletes' needs; 2) assistance/tutorship: 2) curricula requirements; 3) financial support; 4) logistic support; 5) social support; and 6) dual career policies. Fifty of the athletes competed in individual sports and twenty-seven team sports. Of them, 57 was enrolled at undergraduate, 17 was enrolled in a master and 3 in a PhD. The athletes were presented with 13 open-ended questions one by one, and were ensured freedom to interact. All the discussions were recorded. After this, a general discussion took place in which the participants identified and agreed on a final list of statements from their focus group deemed to be relevant to DC athletes as university students. Then, at a consensus meeting, the findings were combined, repetitions were eliminated, and fragmented statements were condensed into broader ones. A final list of 31 statements, organized in six related content units, were identified in relation to the athletes' needs (n = 5), assistance/tutorship (n = 5), curricula requirements (n = 4), financial support (n = 4), logistic support (n = 4), social support (n = 6), and DC policies (n = 3), respectively. In conclusion, this cross-national qualitative research study synthesized the S-As views about their needs and the most relevant DC policies and provisions that higher education institutes should provide to ensure them with positive academic experiences towards the achievement of a degree.
More Related Videos
06:35Using Gold-standard Gait Analysis Methods to Assess Experience Effects on Lower-limb Mechanics During Moderate High-heeled Jogging and Running
Published on: September 14, 2017
10:08Effects of a Novel Neuromuscular Training Intervention on Jump, Sprint, and Change of Direction in Adult Female Soccer Players
Published on: June 10, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Professional Values
The values that are the foundation of the nursing profession are altruism, autonomy, human dignity, and social justice.
First, altruism refers to the concern for the welfare and well-being of others without personal...
Cross-Sectional Research
Secondary Motives: Power Motivation and Achievement Motivation
Power motivation is characterized by the desire to influence, control, or have an impact on others. It is shaped by an individual's experiences, social environment, and cultural context. People with high power motivation are...
Impact of Groups on Individuals
Influence of Parents and Peers on Identity
Parental Influence on Identity Development
Parents serve as primary guides and managers in an adolescent's life, offering support instrumental in decision-making and personal growth....
Socioemotional Experience and Gender Development