Taking stock off psychosocial martial arts research – time for new (theoretical) avenues
Introduction
Martial arts (MA) and psychosocial research has been around since the late 1960s and has
attracted researchers’ attention for various reasons. This body of scholarship has produced
several findings relevant to the explosive rise and popularity of MA in contemporary time.
However, although several reviews and meta-analyses exist on the subject matter, often
underpinned by the research question to what extent, or even whether martial arts benefit
psychosocial development at all, there has been a staggering plateau in theoretical development,
and general lack of attention paid to the theoretical mechanisms that might explain why MA is
conducive to psychosocial development.
This paper proceeds as follows. Firstly, a brief chronological backdrop is given to the
empirical findings that have emerged over the years in psychosocial MA research, showing a
gnarly and complex way of mapping out what can be known of MA’s psychosocial
contributions. Secondly, a more in-depth review of the dominant theoretical frameworks is
given. Third and finally, the paper discusses in what ways we might proceed forward in
conceptualizing and theorizing on MA’s psychosocial contributions.
Martial arts ambiguous nature – empirical twists and turns
This literature can be traced back to the late 60s (Kroll & Carlson, 1967), although the works of
Nosanchuk (1981) and Trulson (1986) seem to constitute a major breaking point for the interest
in MA research. Both authors were interested in how MA could help combat antisocial behavior,
and preliminary findings indicated that MA indeed was associated with decreases in
externalizing behavior (Nosanchuk 1981; Trulson, 1986). By the time, Trulson (1986) thought of
MA as a ‘novel cure’ against juvenile delinquency, characteristic of the deficit-based approach to
youth development. After these seminal works, an array of other authors corroborated that MA
indeed influences youths' psychosocial wellbeing positively (e.g., Daniels & Thornton, 1992,
1990; Skelton et al., 1991) with a specific emphasis on externalizing behavior. The mechanisms
that tentatively underpinned decreases in internalizing and externalizing behavior were
postulated to be, for instance, increased self-esteem (Nosanchuk, 1981). Early research showed
that MA-experience positively correlated with better self-esteem (Richman & Rehberg, 1986)
and less anxiety (Layton, 1990).
New evidence came forth at the turn of the century, disputing MA's allegedly positive
benefits. Children in judo displayed more anger than control groups in both cross-sectional (Eric
Reynes & Lorant, 2001) and longitudinal designs (Reynes & Lorant, 2002). Other studies
showed that karate practice had no impact on children’s externalizing behavior (Reynes &
Lorant, 2002), even after two years of practice; however, judo-practitioners displayed increased
externalizing behavior after the same period of time (Reynes & Lorant, 2004). Shortly afterward,
Endresen and Olweus (2005) published a landmark study with an increased sample size
compared to previous research, showing that MA-practice, categorized as both western and
Asian MAs, lead to heightened levels of externalizing and antisocial behavior. Since then, these
findings have been sporadically corroborated (Mutz, 2012; Sofia & Cruz, 2017). Endresen and
Olweus (2005) concluded that MA pose a societal risk, and its appropriateness for youths should
be seriously considered. Contemporarily, the evidence seems to have shifted again, pointing
towards increased psychosocial wellbeing through several reviews (Harwood et al., 2017;
Lafuente et al., 2021; Valdés-Badilla et al., 2022; van der Kooi, 2020). Lafuente et al. (2021)
concluded that, while relationships between MA and externalizing behavior need further
unpacking, there are some promising but speculative results regarding both youth and adults.
However, Harwood et al. (2017) found largely meta-analytical positive effects in favor of MApractice and externalizing behavior across a diverse spectrum of MAs. Similarly, in another
review (Moore et al., 2020), MA-practice positively affected internalizing behavior, again across
several types of MA. Harwood et al. (2017) addresses this finding and concludes that type of MA
does not seem to impact psychosocial results to the extent one could expect from previous
studies (e.g., Vertonghen et al., 2014). As discussed by Rutten et al. (2011), MA tends to be
milieus with a high degree of regulation of (anti)social behavior. Tentatively, the reason for this
may not only be the philosophical underpinnings but a common understanding of MA as
increasingly riskier and thus in need of extra supervision.
One landmark review (Vertonghen & Theeboom, 2010) concluded that MA’s
psychosocial contribution is at best shown to be weak, and the majority of studies are severely
lacking in rigor, thus questioning the causal effect of MA on psychosocial outcomes. Most
studies are cross-sectional, with flaws in sampling procedures, lacking control groups and more
(Vertonghen & Theeboom, 2010). Evidently, the epistemological foundations underpinning most
of this research is quantitative, and somewhat positivistic.
(Chinkov & Holt, 2016; Sugden, 2021)
Theories explaining martial art and psychosocial outcomes
Inspired by social learning theory (Bandura & McClelland, 1977) and social theory of aggression
(Bandura, 1976) many of the original researchers started their MA-endevours (e.g., Nosanchuk,
1981). This research has postulated that antisocial behavior should increase as a function of MA
according to social learning theory. Accordingly, MA could serve as a compelling learning
environment for fighting techniques, which in turn sanction the inhibition of antisocial behavior.
The following research showed that, while some practitioners seemed to increase in antisocial
behavior, others did not (Nosanchuk & MacNeil, 1989; Trulson, 1986). The alternative
explanation for this was that the practitioners who developed better psychosocial health were
governed by certain principles that explicitly taught them life skills. Accordingly, MAs
psychosocial benefits were only due to certain MAs' philosophical and structural underpinnings;
if these were not invoked, the reverse process could occur. In the years to come, this idea was
largely corroborated, however, this became a contested issue later. Interestingly, some research
(e.g., Reynes & Lorant, 2001, 2002) examines judo – an Asian MA with high standards and
explicit philosophies about morals and codes of conduct, with fairly disappointing results. The
dichotomy between 'soft' Asian MAs and 'hard' western MAs is thus nothing new to the
emergence of mixed martial arts and its psychosocial differences to other sports; additionally, it
seemed questionable whether it was the philosophical and structural underpinnings that
accounted for the variance alone. Later theoretical developments postulated that MA is an
embodied form of psychotherapy (Twemlow et al., 2008). Twemlow et al. (2008) noted through
initial observations (Twemlow et al., 1996) that students in MA usually enrolled 1) at the
backdrop of previous traumatic experiences and 2) were looking for an outlet for aggression. To
Twemlow et al. (2008), this suggested that many MA-practitioners seek a way to control and
manage violent and fearful impulses and to gain a sense of general purpose in life. Twemlow et
al. (2008) take a different approach, melding several disciplines into their framework. For
example, the authors invoke arguments from both social,- evolutionary,- and developmental
psychology. Twemlow et al. (2008) suggests that children are born with a predisposed aggressive
inclination because of survival reasons. These are usually socialized away, but
Although MA is often framed as a ‘unique’ format of exercising, holding unique properties and
opportunities, the psychosocial outcomes due to MA is often linked to the physical activity in
itself. For instance, Valdés-Badilla et al. (2022) frame MA within the notion of physical activity
strategies, where combat sports are ‘unconventional’ strategies, with reference to the risk-factor
inherent in combat sports. Moreover, in reviewing boxing interventions and mental health,
Bozdarov et al. (2022) compare the exercise of boxing to that of HIIT [high intensity interval
training], while still maintaining that boxing “…appears unique compared to other HIIT aerobic
exercises due to the constant focus on technique, using force to strike an object and interplay of
mind/body connection” (p. 9). While it is clear that physical activity is immensely important to
developmental outcomes, is precisely these interlinked elements that need further theoretical
unpacking in the context of why MA specifically should be considered unique.
Later theoretical developments postulated that MA is an embodied form of psychotherapy
(Twemlow et al., 2008). Twemlow et al. (2008) noted through initial observations (Twemlow et
al., 1996) that students in MA usually enrolled 1) at the backdrop of previous traumatic
experiences and 2) were looking for an outlet for aggression. To Twemlow et al. (2008), this
suggested that many MA-practitioners seek a way to control and manage violent and fearful
impulses and to gain a sense of general purpose in life. Twemlow et al. (2008) take a different
approach, melding several disciplines into their framework. For example, the authors invoke
arguments from both social,- evolutionary,- and developmental psychology. Twemlow et al.
(2008) suggests that children are born with a predisposed aggressive inclination because of
survival reasons. These are usually socialized away, but individuals with, e.g., absent parents,
follow this trajectory and lack empathy and the ability to mentalize. Likewise, delinquent
individuals who enter MA may lack this embodied mentalization-ability but will be implicitly
and explicitly be taught it in the MA-environment. As Twemlow et al. (2008) also notes, it may
not be the philosophical underpinnings, but a general sense of ‘how-to’ in the MA-environment,
and a generally friendly environment that facilitate MA-practitioners’ psychosocial health.
Later theoretical models have combined the ecological frameworks and still argued for the
importance of Twemlow et al.’s (2008) theoretical contribution. According to this model, MA is
a corporeal experience, unlike most other sports, with connotations to the developmental concept
of rough-and-tumble play (RTP). RTP is defined as a physical and vigorous play, often involving
elements such as wrestling or ‘play-fighting’. Importantly, it is also defined by positive emotions
and two (or more) consenting parts. RTP is often studied in dyadic forms, between children or
the parent – child dyad. The main assertion behind RTP, is that it constitutes a natural learning
environment for youths, where they both cooperate and engage in ‘risky play’ (StGeorge &
Fletcher, 2019). This play has several implications. For the play to continue, children must be
attentive to each other's physical and emotional boundaries. When these boundaries are
overstepped, the play stop. This incentivizes children to develop a sensitivity towards each other,
where outcomes are self-regulatory abilities and better adaptive functioning. For example, RTP
has been shown to be connected to increased socio-emotional competence (Nakagawa &
Sukigara, 2014).
The perhaps most recent example that might tell us in which way theoretical explanatory
frameworks are growing is that of Moore's (2023) doctoral dissertation.
Discussion
References
Bozdarov, J., Jones, B. D. M., Daskalakis, Z. J., & Husain, M. I. (2022). Boxing as an
intervention in mental health: A scoping review. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 1–
12.
Chinkov, A. E., & Holt, N. L. (2016). Implicit Transfer of Life Skills Through Participation in
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 28(2), 139–153.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2015.1086447
Daniels, K., & Thornton, E. (1992). Length of training, hostility and the martial arts: a
comparison with other sporting groups. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 26(3), 118–120.
Daniels, K., & Thornton, E. W. (1990). An analysis of the relationship between hostility and
training in the martial arts. Journal of Sports Sciences, 8(2), 95–101.
Endresen, I. M., & Olweus, D. (2005). Participation in power sports and antisocial involvement
in preadolescent and adolescent boys. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46(5),
468–478.
Harwood, A., Lavidor, M., & Rassovsky, Y. (2017). Reducing aggression with martial arts: A
meta-analysis of child and youth studies. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 34, 96–101.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2017.03.001
Kroll, W., & Carlson, B. R. (1967). Discriminant Function and Hierarchial Grouping Analysis of
Karate Participants’ Personality Profiles’. Research Quarterly. American Association for
Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 38(3), 405–411.
Lafuente, J., Zubiaur, M., & Gutiérrez-García, C. (2021). Effects of martial arts and combat
sports training on anger and aggression: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent
Behavior, 101611.
Layton, C. (1990). Anxiety in black-belt and nonblack-belt traditional karateka. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 71(3), 905–906.
Moore, B., Dudley, D., & Woodcock, S. (2020). The effect of martial arts training on mental
health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Bodywork and
Movement Therapies, 24(4), 402–412.
Moore, B. W. (2023). Physical activity and mental health: a randomised controlled trial
examining martial arts training as a psychosocial intervention in schools. Macquarie
University.
Mutz, M. (2012). Athletic Participation and the Approval and Use of Violence: A Comparison of
Adolescent Males in Different Sports Disciplines. European Journal for Sport and Society,
9(3), 177–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/16138171.2012.11687896
Nosanchuk, T. A. (1981). The way of the warrior: The effects of traditional martial arts training
on aggressiveness. Human Relations, 34(6), 435–444.
Reynes, E, & Lorant, J. (2002). Karate and aggressiveness among eight-year-old boys.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 94(3 PART 1), 1041–1042.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.2002.94.3.1041
Reynes, E, & Lorant, J. (2004). Competitive martial arts and aggressiveness: A 2-yr. longitudinal
study among young boys. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 98(1), 103–115.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.98.1.103-115
Reynes, Eric, & Lorant, J. (2001). Do competitive martial arts attract aggressive children?
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 93(2), 382–386.
Reynes, Eric, & Lorant, J. (2002). Effect of traditional judo training on aggressiveness among
young boys. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 94(1), 21–25.
Richman, C. L. & Rehberg, H. (1986). The development of self-esteem through the martial arts.
International Journal of Sport Psychology, 17, 234–239.
Rutten, E. A., Schuengel, C., Dirks, E., Stams, G. J. J. M., Biesta, G. J. J., & Hoeksma, J. B.
(2011). Predictors of antisocial and prosocial behavior in an adolescent sports context.
Social Development, 20(2), 294–315.
Skelton, D. L., Glynn, M. A., & Berta, S. M. (1991). Aggressive behavior as a function of
Taekwondo ranking. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 72(1), 179–182.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1991.72.1.179
Sofia, R., & Cruz, J. F. A. (2017). Unveiling anger and aggression in sports: The effects of type
of sport, competitive category and success level. Revista de Psicología Del Deporte, 26(2),
21–28.
Sugden, J. T. (2021). Jiu-jitsu and society: Male mental health on the mats. Sociology of Sport
Journal, 1(aop), 1–13.
Trulson, M. E. (1986). Martial arts training: A novel “cure” for juvenile delinquency. Human
Relations, 39(12), 1131–1140.
Valdés-Badilla, P., Herrera-Valenzuela, T., Guzmán-Muñoz, E., Delgado-Floody, P., NúñezEspinosa, C., Monsalves-Álvarez, M., & Andrade, D. C. (2022). Effects of Olympic combat
sports on health-related quality of life in middle-aged and older people: A systematic
review. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 6186.
van der Kooi, M. (2020). Developmental outcomes and meanings in martial arts practice among
youth: a review. European Journal for Sport and Society, 17(2), 96–115.
Vertonghen, J., & Theeboom, M. (2010). The social-psychological outcomes of martial arts
practise among youth: A review. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine, 9(4), 528.
Vertonghen, J., Theeboom, M., & Pieter, W. (2014). Mediating factors in martial arts and
combat sports: an analysis of the type of martial art, characteristics, and social background
of young participants. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 118(1), 41–61.