Exploring performance calibration in relation to better or worse than average effect in physical education

The aim of this study was to explore students’ calibration of sport performance in relation to better or worse than average effect in physical education settings. Participants were 147 fifth and sixth grade students (71 boys, 76 girls) who were tested in a soccer passing accuracy test after they had provided estimations for their own and their peers’ performance in this test. Based on students’ actual and estimated performance, calibration indexes of accuracy and bias were calculated. Moreover, students were classified in better, worse, or equal than average groups based on estimated scores of their own and their peers’ average performance. Results showed that students overestimated their own performance while most of them believed that their own performance was worse than their peers’ average performance. No significant differences in calibration accuracy of soccer passing were found between better, worse, or equal than average groups of students. These results were discussed with reference to previous calibration research evidence and theoretical and practical implications for self-regulated learning and performance calibration in physical education. peerReviewed publishedVersion