Biological factors

The most reported biological factors seem to be a child’s age and gender.

Previous studies have provided information that both age and gender play an important role in the development of MC and PMC. However, the associations between MC and PMC seem to be slightly different, at least in relation to age.

Age plays a crucial role in MC and PMC. In MC, there is compelling evidence-based knowledge that children’s MC increases as a function of age (Bardid et al. 2015; Barnett, Lai, et al. 2016; Iivonen & Sääkslahti 2014; Khodaverdi et al. 2020; Laukkanen et al. 2019; Logan, Webster, Getchell, Pfeiffer, & Robinson 2015; Rintala, Sääkslahti, & Iivonen 2016; Tietjens et al. 2020) due to the rapid biological development during these early years (Venetsanou & Kambas 2011), wherein the high plasticity of the nervous system contributes to a major improvement in coordination (Adolph & Franchak 2017; Malina et al. 2004).

However, children do not develop MC solely through maturational processes as coordinative movements need to be learned, practised and reinforced (Logan, Robinson, Wilson, & Lucas 2012) with increased possibilities for engaging in PA (Gallahue et al. 2012; Robinson et al. 2015; Stodden et al. 2008). In PMC, previous studies have found affirming information based on frameworks (Harter 1999, 2012; Robinson et al. 2015; Stodden et al. 2008) that a child’s younger age seem to be associated with inflated perceptions, thus in higher PMC (Jozsa et al. 2014;

Lopes, Barnett, & Rodrigues 2016; Schmidt, Valkanover, & Conzelmann 2013;

True et al. 2017). As a function of age, as expected based on frameworks, the child’s PMC starts to decline and approximate their actual MC due to cognitive maturation (Harter 1999). In contrast, as stated in section 2.3.2, some findings reveal that between the ages of eight to eleven years, the children’s PMC stabilises rather than declines (Van Veen et al. 2020).

Also gender differences are widely studied in MC (Barnett, Lai, et al. 2016;

Iivonen & Sääkslahti 2014; Lubans et al. 2010; Pill & Harvey 2019; Rintala et al.

2016; Tietjens et al. 2020) and PMC (Afthentopoulou et al. 2018; Estevan, Molina-Garcìa, Abbott et al. 2018; LeGear et al. 2012; Lopes et al. 2018; Pesce et al. 2018;

Slykerman et al. 2016). In MC, the majority of studies report some gender differences (Bardid et al. 2015; Barnett, Lai, et al. 2016; Iivonen & Sääkslahti 2014;

Laukkanen et al. 2019; Spessato, Gabbard, Valentini, & Rudisill 2013) even though there are also studies reporting no gender differences (Kokštejn, Musálek,

43

& Tufano 2017), at least in some aspects of MC (Barnett, Lai, et al. 2016). Based on divergent skill categories, most studies have found that boys had better overall MC than girls (Bardid et al. 2015; Barnett, Lai, et al. 2016; Laukkanen et al.

2019; Spessato, Gabbard, Valentini, et al. 2013). Additionally, boys seem to have better BS (Barnett, Lai, et al. 2016; Goodway, Robinson, & Crowe 2010; LeGear et al. 2012; Rintala et al. 2016; Spessato, Gabbard, Valentini, et al. 2013; Tietjens et al.

2020), while some studies proclaim girls having better LM skills (Hardy, King, Farrell, Macniven, & Howlett 2010; LeGear et al. 2012; Tietjens et al. 2020). Finally, in a study conducted with the M-ABC-2 assessment tool, girls outperformed boys in manual dexterity and in total score (Fairbairn et al. 2020) in addition to balance and body coordination skills (Krombholz 2006; Venetsanou & Kambas 2011).

However, the gender differences seem to be most evident in BS.

These differences in MC based on gender may result in an outcome of a variety of items. For example, the choice of assessment tools is crucial (Barnett, Lai, et al. 2016; LeGear et al. 2012; Spessato, Gabbard, Valentini, et al. 2013), and it is important to use several assessment tools covering divergent aspects of MC (Bardid, Huyben et al. 2016; Cools et al. 2009; Ré et al. 2018). There is also evidence that gender differences are greater in populations where the overall MC level is lower (Laukkanen et al. 2019) or when children do not participate in organised sport (Queiroz, Ré, Henrique, Moura, & Cattuzzo 2014). Importantly, it is suggested that gender differences in early childhood are not based on biological factors (Gallahue et al. 2012) but are more likely related to family, environmental and sociocultural contexts (Eather et al. 2018; Iivonen & Sääkslahti 2014; Krombholz 2006; Spessato, Gabbard, Valentini, et al. 2013); therefore, regardless of the gender of the child, all children should be provided equal possibilities for MC and PA (Okely, Booth, & Chey 2004; Queiroz et al. 2014).

In PMC, differences between boys and girls are widely studied, and the findings are slightly contradictory. The majority of the studies have stated that boys seem to have higher overall PMC compared to girls (Clark, Moran, Drury, Venetsanou, & Fernandes 2018; Duncan et al. 2018; Slykerman et al. 2016) even though there are several studies reporting no gender differences (Lintunen 1995;

Lopes, Barnett, & Rodrigues 2016; Lopes et al. 2018; Pönkkö 1999). There are also studies showing gender differences related to boys having better perception of BS (Afthentopoulou et al. 2018; Barnett, Ridgers, & Salmon 2015; Carcamo-Oyarzun et al. 2020; Estevan, Molina-Garcìa, Abbott et al. 2018; LeGear et al. 2012;

Liong et al. 2015; Slykerman et al. 2016; Tietjens et al. 2020). Perception of LM skills seem to be less distinctive between the genders. One study stated that girls perceived themselves as higher than boys in body control skills (Carcamo-Oyarzun et al. 2020). Interestingly, however, Pesce et al. (2018) showed that related to gender differences in PMC, most girls underestimated and most boys overestimated their actual BS. The same tendency was reflected in the study by Tietjens et al. (2020), where girls were better in actual LM skills but nevertheless did not perceive themselves to be better than boys. However, in the same study, boys were better in actual BS and were also perceived to be better than girls.

44

Consequently, it remains to be discovered how gender differences may emerge in PMC.

Both MC and PMC are associated with lower weight status. Several studies have found evidence that MC has an inverse association with body weight or BMI (D’Hondt et al. 2013; D’Hondt et al. 2014; Laukkanen et al. 2019; Lopes, Stodden, Bianchi, Maia, & Rodrigues 2012; Matarma et al. 2018; Slotte et al. 2015).

This finding is in line with the hypothesis of the conceptual framework by Stodden et al. (2008). Systematic reviews of Lubans et al. (2010) and Barnett, Lai, et al. (2016) revealed that healthy weight status was a positive correlate of MC.

Additionally, Utesch et al. (2019) stated that there is a moderate-to-large positive relationship between MC and physical fitness, which strengthens with age.

Similarly, in relation to PMC, higher PMC has been related inversely to BMI or body weight (Carcamo-Oyarzun et al. 2020; Jones et al. 2010; Spessato, Gabbard, Robinson, et al. 2013; Toftegaard-Stoeckel et al. 2010), underscoring the fact that children with positive PMC are most likely of normal weight.

To date, there is evidence-based knowledge that a child’s individual reaction style, called temperament, is associated with the child’s PA (Song, Corwyn, Bradley, & Lumeng 2017), amount of screen time (Leppänen et al. 2020;

Määttä et al. 2020) and PA parenting (Laukkanen et al. 2018; Song et al. 2017). In contrast, a study conducted with two and a half to five year old Canadian children did not find any association between parental-reported temperament traits and objectively measured PA and SB in children (Irwin, Johnson, Vanderloo, Burke, & Tucker 2015). However, in another North American study, Song et al. (2017) found that a high temperament activity level at the age of four and a half years was associated with higher levels of MVPA at the age of nine years. This association was moderated by parental support for PA. Similarly, a study by Laukkanen et al. (2018) demonstrated that children with an agreeable temperament (referring to a factor created from the total scores for sociability, activity and attention span persistence) tended to have more parental support for PA.

Temperament is rather stable (Rowe & Plomin 1977; Zentner & Bates 2008) over time, and it is often divided into the following three dimensions: (1) surgency, characterised, for example, by a high activity level and impulsivity; (2) effortful control, characterised, for example, by inhibitory control and low-intensity pleasure; and (3) negative affectivity, characterised, for example, by sadness, fear and being difficult to soothe (Putnam & Rothbart 2006). As children can be differentially sensitive to the effects of the environment depending on their temperament (Boyce & Ellis 2005), it has been hypothesised that a child’s self-regulation (i.e. the capacity to engage in goal-directed behaviour) may be linked to health behaviours (Miller & Lumeng 2018), such as eating habits (Anderson, Bandini, Dietz, & Must 2004; Bergmeier, Skouteris, Horwood, Hooley,

& Richardson 2014), PA (Irwin et al. 2015; Song et al. 2017), the development of a physically (in)active lifestyle (Yang et al. 2017) and screen time (Leppänen et al.

2020; Määttä et al. 2020). According to a systematic review by Bergmeier et al.

(2014), a child’s temperament was associated with maternal feeding behaviours

45 in early childhood, which, consequently, have been shown to influence childhood overweight and obesity. Interestingly, this emerging area of research lacks studies that further examine this relationship between temperament and obesogenic risk factors in preschool-aged children. Additionally, Anderson et al.

(2004) claimed that girls with a high-activity temperament were leaner than girls with a low-activity temperament. Hence, they suggested that movement may play a role in the development of obesity. On one hand, it is well-documented that movement and PA prevent obesity (Barnett, Lai, et al. 2016; Lubans et al.

2010); on the other hand, it is not well-known whether temperament has influence on BMI, weight gain, PA and, directly or indirectly, also to MC and PMC.