This document summarizes research on the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and factors like physical health, psychological health, academic achievement, and athletic achievement. The research finds that lower SES is associated with less access to physical activity resources and poorer physical health behaviors/outcomes. It also links lower SES neighborhoods to fewer free physical activity resources compared to paid options. Additionally, the document discusses relationships between physical/psychological health, physical activity, and academic performance, with various health factors more closely correlated with achievement than SES alone.

1. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 1
A Review of the Effects of Socioeconomic Status on Academic and
Athletic Achievement and Physical and Mental Health
John B. Eckert II
Ohio University

2. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 2
Table of Contents
Abstract ____________________________________________________________________ 3
Literature Review ____________________________________________________________ 4
How is socioeconomic status (SES) associated with physical health (PH) and
psychological health (PsH) indicators?______________________________________ 4
SES is associated with access to physical activity (PA) resources. __________ 4
SES is associated with physical health (PH) behaviors. __________________ 7
PA and PH indicators are associated with PsH indicators. ________________ 8
How is academic achievement (AA) associated to physical activity (PA), physical health
(PH) and psychological health (PsH)? ______________________________________ 10
Co-morbidities related to lack of PA and PH are more closely related to low AA
than lack of PA or PH themselves. ___________________________________ 10
Various elements of a PA and PH have stronger associations to AA than either PA
or PH as a whole. ________________________________________________ 12
How is socioeconomic status (SES) associated with academic achievement (AA) and
athletic achievement (AtA)? ______________________________________________ 14
Various elements of a student's SES have stronger associations to his or her AA
than SES as a whole. ______________________________________________ 14
SES is related to achievement in athletic competition. ____________________ 17
Conclusions _________________________________________________________________ 19
References __________________________________________________________________ 21

3. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 3
Abstract
In this review of existing literature, three main questions were examined. How is
socioeconomic status (SES) associated with physical health (PH) and psychological health
indicators? How is socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with academic achievement (AA)?
How is academic achievement associated to physical activity (PA) and physical health (PH)?
Existing literature consistently found that in general terms, SES is not a strong predictor
of either athletic or academic achievement. However, stronger positive and negative associations
were found between achievement and more specific elements of SES. Proximity and access to
PA and academic/educational resources were consistently associated with achievement and with
behaviors associated to achievement. Research also showed association between PA and PH and
academic achievement and psychological health including increased sense of self-worth, purpose
and social inclusion. These variables were found to be more closely correlated to achievement
than SES.
Research was gathered using a variety of online databases and cross examined with
synthesis matrices for common findings and points of contrast within the research body.

4. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 4
Literature Review
How is socioeconomic status (SES) associated with physical health (PH) and psychological
health (PsH) indicators?
According to a meta-analysis of existing literature, there is a statistically recognizable
association between socioeconomic status (SES) and physical health (PH) and psychological
health (PsH) indicators. Based on the assumption, which will be examined later in the paper, that
physical and psychological health are associated with academic and athletic achievement, we
attempt to examine the relationship between socioeconomic status and academic achievement
(AA) and athletic achievement (AtA). Research found that socioeconomic status was positively
correlated to access to physical activity (PA) resources and that such access was associated with
rates of obesity and other physical health indicators. Socioeconomic status and access to physical
activity resources were also associated with a range of physical health behaviors, including
physical activity. Research also found that some psychological health indicators associated with
low socioeconomic status were found to be relatively strong predictors of achievement.
According to Estabrooks (2003), low socioeconomic status and racially and ethnically
diverse neighborhoods have environmental characteristics that limit both accessibility and
availability of physical activity resources. Barriers that negatively impact availability and
accessibility of physical activity resources in low socioeconomic status neighborhoods include
high-risk zones such as construction and heavy or high-speed vehicular traffic. Financial
barriers, transportation infrastructure, and distance were common barriers in low socioeconomic

5. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 5
status neighborhoods. Pollution or industrial waste were also among factors that limited access to
physical activity resources, as were areas with high concentrations of violent or criminal activity,
such as gang turf.
To test their hypothesis that low socioeconomic status neighborhoods would have
reduced access to physical activity resources, researchers generated a “comprehensive list” of
physical activity resources per tract designated by the U.S. Census Bureau, then compared
census data for a given tract to the physical activity resources in the same tract (Estabrooks,
2003). Results showed that, “low-SES (M = 4.5±2.3) and medium-SES (M = 4.9±2.6)
neighborhoods had significantly fewer resources than high-SES (M = 8.4±3.5) neighborhoods.”
(Estabrooks, 2003).
Furthermore, Estabrooks (2003) found that medium and low socioeconomic status
neighborhoods had similar access to pay-for-use physical activity resources as high
socioeconomic status neighborhoods, but low and medium socioeconomic status neighborhoods
had decreased access to free physical activity resources. Given their low to medium
socioeconomic status, the presence of pay-for-use facilities may not have the same benefits to
physical health or psychological health as in high socioeconomic status neighborhoods. It would
seem these neighborhoods have a greater need for access to free physical activity facilities and
resources.
Two studies by Lisa Powell (2006, 2007) further examine the relationship between
socioeconomic status and the rates of commercial pay-for-use physical activity resources. The
studies find the quantity of commercial pay-for-use physical activity resources by zip code and

6. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 6
compare this to demographic information including socioeconomic status. As with Estabrooks’
findings on pay-for-use physical activity facilities and resources, this research found that,
“commercial physical activity–related facilities were less likely to be present in lower-income
neighborhoods and in neighborhoods with higher proportions of African American residents,
residents with Hispanic ethnicity, and residents of other racial minority backgrounds.” (Powell,
2006).
More importantly, in her research following this study, Powell (2007) found a small but
statistically significant association between rates of adolescent physical activity and the
availability of commercial physical activity facilities, further indicating that socioeconomic
status is associated to access to physical activity resources and this does, in fact, affect the rates
of physical activity which in turn is associated with physical health and psychological health
indicators.
Like Estabrooks and Powell, research by Gordon-Larsen (2006) also found that as
socioeconomic status increased, access to physical activity resources increased. This research
also built on Powell’s findings by comparing rates of obesity, gathered from U.S. Center for
Disease Control, to socioeconomic status. Researchers found a negative relationship between
rates of obesity and related comorbidities and socioeconomic status. Each study indicates that as
socioeconomic status increases, access to physical activity resources both pay-for-use and free,
increases, and like Powell’s research, Gordon-Larsen shows that an increase in physical activity
resources is related to a decrease in negative physical health indicators. However, access is not

7. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 7
the only factor at play in the relationship between socioeconomic status, physical health, and
psychological health.
In addition to limited access to physical activity resources, are low socioeconomic status
families more likely to have behavioral challenges to physical health/psychological health than
high socioeconomic status families? Research from Hanson (2007) and Raudsepp (2006) found
that socioeconomic status is associated with physical health and psychological health behaviors.
Hanson (2007) examined physical health behaviors including tobacco use, marijuana use,
alcohol use, diet and physical activity. This research indicated that in general, as socioeconomic
status decreases, the rates of negative physical health behaviors increase, exacerbating
challenges that exist with the lack of access to physical activity and physical health resources.
Tobacco and alcohol use generally increase in lower socioeconomic status populations.
Marijuana use was found to be relatively stable across populations. Diet and nutrition were
found to vary greatly by socioeconomic status with low socioeconomic status diets generally
skewed towards low nutrition fast foods and quick preparation meals, as well as more irregular
eating habits. These behaviors, coupled with less physical activity, indicate that socioeconomic
status is associated with physical health and related psychological health and that low
socioeconomic status populations are significantly more likely to face challenges in physical
health and related psychological health.
Raudsepp’s study (2006) examined the associations between socioeconomic status,
adolescent physical activity and mothers and fathers social support of adolescent physical
activity. This research showed a positive correlation between socioeconomic status and parental

8. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 8
support of adolescent physical activity. It also found a positive correlation between
socioeconomic status and parental modelling of physical activity and physical health behaviors.
Additionally, both parental modelling and support were shown to have a positive
correlation with adolescent physical activity. Therefore, if parental modelling and support of
physical activity behaviors across a given population increases as socioeconomic status
increases, and if adolescent physical activity increases as these two variables increase, then as
socioeconomic status increases, one would expect to see adolescent physical activity increase in
the given population. It may also be reasonable to hypothesize that these correlations exist with
other physical health behaviors such as tobacco and alcohol use and dietary habits in support of
Hanson’s findings and to therefore tentatively draw the same conclusions. In order to examine
the relationship between socioeconomic status, physical health, psychological health and
achievement, we must also examine the relationship between physical activity and physical and
psychological health and their associations to socioeconomic status.
Is psychological health related to physical activity and physical health, and does it,
therefore, share their relationship to socioeconomic status, and ultimately, does that relationship
correlate with academic achievement (AA) and/or athletic achievement? Research by Fox
(2009), Fejgin (1994) and Spreitzer (1973), examined the relationship that physical activity
and sports participation (SP) share with academic achievement. We will more closely discuss
this research as we consider our second research question. However, with regard to the
relationship between physical activity, physical health, and psychological health, their research

9. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 9
found that physical activity and sports participation were linked to increased confidence,
motivation, and self-image in adolescents.
If we assume that the relationship between socioeconomic status and sports participation
is similar to the relationship between socioeconomic status and physical activity, and if physical
activity and sports participation are positively correlated to confidence, motivation, self-image
and other psychological health indicators, then we can conclude that socioeconomic status is also
associated with overall psychological health.
Based on the findings of Estabrooks, Fox, Gordon-Larsen, Hanson, Powell, and
Raudsepp, we can conclude that socioeconomic status is associated with and generally positively
correlated to physical and psychological health. If this is the case, and research also shows show
that physical and psychological health are associated with academic and athletic achievement,
then we can conclude that socioeconomic status is also associated with academic and athletic
achievement.

10. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 10
How is academic achievement (AA) associated to physical activity (PA), physical health
(PH) and psychological health (PsH)?
Meta-analysis of existing research regarding the relationship between academic
achievement (AA) and physical activity (PA), physical health (PH) and psychological health
(PH) indicates that variables related to physical activity and physical health are associated with
psychological health. Psychological health is shown to be a more effective predictor of academic
achievement than physical activity or physical health.
Research by Naomi Fejgin (1994) showed that physical activity and sports participation
(SP) were positively correlated to grades, self-image, focus, and educational aspirations and
negatively correlated to discipline and delinquency. Like previously discussed research (?), this
study also found that physical activity and sports participation were unevenly distributed among
populations along gender, socioeconomic status, and racial/ethnic demarcations. These findings
were corroborated by the aforementioned research of Claudia Fox (2009) as well as that of
Elmer Spreitzer (1973).
Using a nationwide self-reported study of tenth graders, Fox (2009) compared weekly
hours of physical activity and sports participation to academic letter grades. Statistical
regressions were used to test both the relationship between physical activity and sports
participation independently to grade point average as well as to their combined relationship to
grade point average.
The study found that both physical activity and sports participation were independently
associated with grade point average among girls but that only sports participation could be
independently associated with grade point average among boys. A general association between

11. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 11
physical activity, sports participation and grade point average was also found, though weaker
than the independent associations. Spreitzer’s research (1973) found that athletes in both high
school and college outperformed non-athletes academically, even when adjusting for populations
of each group. Furthermore, this research found that athletes have higher educational aspirations
than non-athletes and exhibit physical health and academic behaviors associated with higher
secondary and post-secondary attendance and achievement.
However, all three studies also conclude that while physical activity and sports
participation are associated with academic achievement, confounding variables related to
physical activity and sports participation may be more closely correlated to academic
achievement than either physical activity or sports participation in and of themselves. Fox’s
research found that students who reported more hours-per-week of physical activity or sports
participation reported higher scores on self-image, confidence, inclusion, focus, and athletic and
academic aspirations. When testing the relationship between these scores and letter grades, the
study found a stronger correlation to grades than observed with either physical activity or sports
participation themselves. In addition to the psychological health indicators mentioned above,
research found that comorbidities associated with fewer hours-per-week of physical activity or
sports participation were associated with lower grades, increased absence and increased
discipline issues.
Essentially, students who reported fewer hours of physical activity or sports participation
are more likely to have health issues that contribute to absence or discipline issues that
negatively impact achievement. Fejgin’s research (1994) found that athletes scored higher on

12. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 12
assessments of peer relationships, self-confidence, and parental support, which were found to
correlate more strongly to grade point average than either physical activity or sports participation
themselves. Spreitzer (1973) found that behaviors such as goal-setting, discipline and
determination were more closely related to achievement than either physical activity or sports
participation themselves, and that athletes were more likely to exhibit such behaviors than non-
athletes. Though the research indicates a relationship between behaviors associated with
achievement and physical activity and sports participation, it could not determine that those
behaviors are more closely related to physical activity and sports participation or to
socioeconomic status or other confounding variables.
Based on the research of Fejgin, Fox and Spreitzer, it is not easy to conclude that
physical activity and sports participation, and by extension physical health, are strongly
associated with academic achievement. These findings do demonstrate some association between
physical activity, physical health and academic achievement but suggest that factors related to
physical activity, physical health and psychological health may be more strongly associated with
academic achievement. Unfortunately, this research does not manage to independently associate
physical activity, sports participation and physical health to the behaviors and psychological
health factors associated with achievement.
However, if we assume that the behaviors and psychological health factors associated
with academic achievement are at least as strongly related to physical activity and physical
health as to any likely confounding variable, it is reasonable to conclude that physical activity,
physical health and psychological health are positively correlated to academic achievement. If

13. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 13
we conclude that physical activity, physical health and psychological health are positively
correlated to academic achievement and athletic achievement, and if we also conclude that
socioeconomic status is positively correlated to physical activity, physical health and
psychological health, then it is reasonable to conclude that socioeconomic status is also
positively correlated to academic achievement and athletic achievement.

14. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 14
How is socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with academic achievement (AA) and athletic
achievement (AtA)?
Meta-analysis of existing research found while socioeconomic status is associated with
academic achievement and athletic achievement, in general, socioeconomic status is not a strong
predictor of achievement in either academics or athletics. However, confounding variables
related to socioeconomic status were found to be more strongly correlated with academic
achievement and athletic achievement than socioeconomic status itself.
Research by Julian Betts (2000) studied the relationship between socioeconomic
status, distribution and availability of academic resources (AR) and academic achievement to
determine if the apparent relationship between socioeconomic status and academic achievement
could be explained by the distribution and availability of academic resources. Specifically, the
research considers three questions, “how resources (i.e., class size, curriculum, and teachers'
education, credentials, and experiences) vary among schools; whether schools serving relatively
disadvantaged populations tend to receive fewer resources; and whether existing inequalities in
school resources contribute to unequal student outcomes.” (Betts, 2000).
The researchers found that there was statistically significant variance between resources
available to schools and that schools with relatively higher rates of low socioeconomic status
families had fewer academic resources available to them. Researchers also found a stronger
correlation between access to academic resources and academic achievement than between
socioeconomic status and academic achievement. Authors conclude that while access to

15. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 15
academic resources is positively correlated to socioeconomic status, it is a more accurate
predictor of academic achievement than socioeconomic status.
A similar study by Paul Sackett (2009), examined the relationship between
socioeconomic status and performance on standardized college entrance exams and whether this
relationship predicts performance in post-secondary education in an attempt to test the assertion
that results on college entrance exams result as much from a student's’ socioeconomic status as
any other variable and are therefore not necessarily strong predictors of post-secondary academic
achievement.
As we might expect based on Betts’ findings regarding relationship between
socioeconomic status, academic resources and academic achievement, this study finds that the
correlation between socioeconomic status and performance on entrance exams is relatively
low. Since both studies show that socioeconomic status is not strongly correlated to academic
achievement, it is not surprising that this study also found that socioeconomic status alone is not
a strong predictor of post-secondary academic performance. However, results also found that
combining socioeconomic status and entrance exam scores provided a reasonable prediction of
post-secondary academic performance.
Like the findings regarding the association between physical activity, physical health and
academic achievement discussed earlier, specific variables related to socioeconomic status were
found to more closely relate to academic achievement than socioeconomic status itself. Several
factors were recognized to confound the apparent correlation between socioeconomic status,
exam performance and post-secondary academic performance. Differing policies on entrance

16. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 16
requirements, demographic requirements, and academic history may have had as much effect on
students’ entrance exams scores and post-secondary academic performance as any factor related
to socioeconomic status.
Research by Karl White (1983) examined the relationship between socioeconomic status
and academic achievement through a meta-analysis of existing literature to find that, like Betts
and Sackett, the actual correlation between socioeconomic status and academic achievement is
relatively low and that various confounding variables related to socioeconomic status are actually
more strongly correlated to academic achievement than socioeconomic status itself. “Variables
considered in the meta-analysis accounted for 75% of the variance in observed correlation
coefficients in the studies examined.” (White, 1983).
Like Betts, this research found that access to academic resources was more closely
related to academic achievement than socioeconomic status itself. It also found that
environmental barriers that limit access to academic resources, like those that limit access to
physical activity and physical health resources discussed earlier, have a greater impact on
academic achievement than socioeconomic status itself. The most significant predictor of
academic achievement that this research found was family characteristics. Family characteristics
associated with academic achievement were found to have a loose positive correlation to
socioeconomic status, highlighting one of the reasons socioeconomic status itself is not a strong
predictor of academic achievement. If this is the case, we may also hypothesize that factors
related to socioeconomic status will be more strongly correlated to athletic achievement than
socioeconomic status itself.

17. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 17
A study by Miguel Humara (2000) sought to identify psychological traits that could
accurately predict achievement of recruits, measured by starting status, in NCAA football. The
research we have examined thus far suggests that these traits are positively correlated to physical
activity, sports participation, physical health and psychological health. Furthermore, research
indicates that physical activity, sports participation, physical health and psychological health are
positively correlated to socioeconomic status. If both of these premises are presumed accurate, it
is reasonable to conclude that socioeconomic status could predict NCAA starting status: Recruits
from relatively higher socioeconomic status backgrounds are more likely to have access to a
range of physical activity, physical health, and psychological health resources and opportunities
than those from relatively lower socioeconomic status backgrounds.
Like Fejgin (1994) and Spreitzer (1973), Humara (2000) examined a wide range of
psychological traits in incoming freshman football players such as motivation, self-image,
discipline and response to adversity to identify which traits were most commonly exhibited in
starting players to use when identifying recruits and predicting their starting status. Biographic
information on players who exhibit these traits was then examined to identify factors likely to
nurture such traits in developing players. Factors such as family size, parental involvement and
school size and resources were found to have the strongest relationship to the desired
psychological traits. While these factors may be associated with socioeconomic status, there was
no statistically significant difference in socioeconomic status among starting players in the study.
This further suggests that socioeconomic status itself is not a strong predictor of achievement but
that related variables are more strongly tied to academic achievement and athletic achievement.

18. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 18
Interestingly, Humara found that across all recruits, not just those that achieve starting
status, players from relatively lower socioeconomic status backgrounds averaged higher scores
on the traits identified as most likely to predict starting status. So while little difference was
found in socioeconomic status backgrounds among starters and despite the improved access to
sports participation and other physical activity and physical health resources that relatively
higher socioeconomic status recruits may have, players from relatively low socioeconomic status
backgrounds may have more of the psychological traits associated with starting status and
achievement in general.

19. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 19
Conclusions
Research shows that socioeconomic status is positively correlated with physical activity,
sports participation, and physical health and psychological health. It also shows that physical
activity, sports participation, physical health and psychological health are positively correlated
with academic achievement and athletic achievement. Based on these findings, one may infer
that socioeconomic status is positively correlated with academic achievement and athletic
achievement and the research supports this across large samples.
However, socioeconomic status alone was consistently found to be a poor predictor of
achievement in individual cases. If the correlation is present across a sample but does not
accurately predict individual cases, it must be assumed that other variables account for the
variance between the correlation across a sample and individual outcomes. Researchers found a
range of physical and psychological variables related to socioeconomic status that more
accurately predicted individual outcomes than socioeconomic status and demonstrated stronger
correlations across samples. Using socioeconomic status to predict individual academic
achievement or athletic achievement appears unlikely to have a high probability of accuracy.
However, socioeconomic status may be an effective way to identify variables which more
accurately predict individual academic achievement or athletic achievement.
While the hypothesis, that if socioeconomic status is associated with physical
health and psychological health indicators, and if physical health and psychological health is
associated academic and athletic achievement, then socioeconomic status is associated with

20. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 20
academic and athletic achievement has not been disproven, it has been shown the hypothesized
association between socioeconomic status and achievement is weak and the evidence does not
strongly support the hypothesis.
In truth, common sense would suggest that socioeconomic status alone is not a
good predictor of individual achievement and that related variables are more closely related to
achievement that socioeconomic status itself. Achievement is the result of such a wide range of
factors that it is illogical to expect a single general variable such as socioeconomic status to
predict it effectively. However, examining research that identifies the related variables and
quantifies these relationships will help make future research more effective as researchers can
more closely examine these related variables and their relationships with each other and
achievement. As this study moves into the data gathering process, efforts will be made to ensure
that pertinent socioeconomic status related variables will be examined to filter the effects of
confounding variables on the relationship between socioeconomic status and athletic
achievement in the sample population.

21. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 21
References
Betts, J. R., Rueben, K. S., & Danenberg, A. (2000). Equal resources, equal outcomes?: The
distribution of school resources and student achievement in California. San Francisco,
CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
Estabrooks, P. A., Lee, R. E., & Gyurcsik, N. C. (2003, April). Resources for physical
activity participation: Does availability and accessibility differ by neighborhood
socioeconomic status? Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 25(2), 100-104
Fejgin, N. (1994, September 1). Participation in high school competitive sports: A
subversion of school mission or contribution to academic goals? Sociology of Sport
Journal, 11(3), 211-230. doi:10.1123/ssj.11.3.211
Fox, C. K., Barr-Anderson, D., Neumark-Sztainer, D., & Wall, M. (2009, December 21).
Physical activity and sports team participation: Associations with academic outcomes in
middle school and high school students. Journal of School Health,80(1), 31-37.
doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2009.00454.x
Gordon-Larsen, P., Nelson, M. C., Bage, P., & Popkin, B. M. (2006, February 01). Inequality in
the built environment underlies key health disparities in physical activity and obesity.
Pediatrics, 117(2), 417-424. doi:10.1542/peds.2005-0058
Hanson, M. D., & Chen, E. (2007, May 20). Socioeconomic status and health behaviors in
adolescence:A review of the literature. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 30(3), 263-285.
doi:10.1007/s10865-007-9098-3
Humara, M. (2000, May). Personnel selection in athletic programs. Athletic Insight, 2(2).
Powell, L. M., Slater, S., Chaloupka, F. J., & Harper, D. (2006, September). Availability
of physical activity–related facilities and neighborhood demographic and socioeconomic
characteristics: A national study. American Journal of Public Health, 96(9), 1676-1680.
doi:10.2105/ajph.2005.065573
Powell, L. M., Chaloupka, F. J., Slater, S. J., Johnston, L. D., & O’Malley, P. M. (2007,
October). The availability of local-area commercial physical activity–related facilities
and physical activity among adolescents. American Journal of Preventive Medicine,
33(4). doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2007.07.002
Raudsepp, L. (2006) The relationship between socio-economic status, parental support and
adolescent physical activity. Acta Paediatrica, 95(1), 93-98.
doi:10.1080/08035250500323772

22. A review of the effects of socioeconomic status on achievement 22
Sackett, P. R., Kuncel, N. R., Arneson, J. J., Cooper, S. R., & Waters, S. D. (2009, January).
Does socioeconomic status explain the relationship between admissions tests and post-
secondary academic performance? Psychological Bulletin, 135(1), 1-22.
doi:10.1037/a0013978
Speiler, M., Czech, D. R., Joyner, A. B., Munkasy, B., Gentner, N., & Long, J. (2007, June).
Predicting athletic success: Factors contributing to the success of NCAA division I AA
collegiate football players. Athletic Insight, 9(2).
Spreitzer, E., & Pugh, M. (1973). Interscholastic athletics and educational expectations.
Sociology of Education, 46(2), 171. doi:10.2307/2112095
Taylor, W. C., Poston, W. S., Jones, L., & Kraft, M. K. (2006). Environmental justice: obesity,
physical activity, and healthy eating. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 3(S1), 530-
554. doi:10.1123/jpah.3.s1.s30
White, K. R. (1982, May). The relation between socioeconomic status and academic
achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 91(3), 461-481. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.91.3.461