“We wouldn’t of made friends if we didn’t come to Football United”:the impacts of a football program on young people’s peer, prosocial and cross-cultural relationships

Table 3 Outcomes for all participants

Outcome	FUn	Comparison	Statistic	P	Effect size	Power
Strengths and difficulties, mean (SD)
Emotional symptoms^†	3.27 (2.61)	3.32 (2.07)	t_2,133 = 0.13	0.90	0.02	0.06
Hyperactivity^†	2.88 (2.09)	2.96 (1.66)	t_2,129 = 0.24	0.82	0.04	0.08
Peer problems^†	2.95 (2.05)	3.19 (1.57)	t_2,131 = 0.75	0.46	0.13	0.18
Prosocial behaviour^‡	8.56 (1.44)	8.05 (2.21)	t_2,136 = 1.64	0.10	0.27	0.50
Other-group orientation^†, mean (SD)	1.80 (0.62)	2.12 (0.68)	t_2,140 = 2.30	0.006	0.46	0.90
Resilience^‡*, mean (SD)	3.59 (1.07)	3.69 (1.06)	t_2,138 = 0.54	0.59	0.09	0.14
Social inclusion, mean (SD)
Most people can be trusted†	2.48 (0.92)	2.29 (0.95)	t_2,138 = 1.15	0.25	0.20	0.33
Run into friends in the local area†	2.48 (0.96)	2.56 (0.84)	t_2,138 = 0.53	0.59	0.09	0.13
Social inclusion, n(%)
Have family members living in the neighbourhood			χ² ₁ = 3.26	0.07	0.01
Yes	34 (54.8)	55 (69.6)
No	28 (45.2)	24 (30.4)
Have close friends in the neighbourhood			χ² ₁ = 0.07	0.79	0.01
Yes	32 (51.6)	39 (49.4)
No	30 (48.4)	40 (50.6)
Know people living in the neighbourhood			χ² ₁ = 2.56	0.11	0.01
Many or most	41 (66.1)	58 (78.4)
Few or none	21 (33.9)	16 (21.6)

^† Lower score is more positive response, ie.fewer emotional symptoms, less hyperactive behaviour and fewer peer problems.
^‡ Higher score is more positive response, ie. more prosocial behaviour and more resilient.
* Ability to adapt to changes and bounce back after illness, injury or other hardships.

ISSN: 1471-2458