The effect of the London 2012 olympic games
As part of the London 2012 Olympic Games the Great British Government presented a legacy that they hoped would aid them to win the bid to host the games. This included what they hoped would become beneficial long-term effects socially and economically for Great Britain. One of the claims made the government was: ‘Harnessing the United Kingdom’s passion for sport to increase grass roots participation, particularly by young people – and to encourage the whole population to be more physically active’. Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2010) Meaning that hosting the games would change the nation’s attitude towards physical ctivity, contributing to a hopeful increase in participation in sport. This investigation explores the link between hosting the Olympic Games and sports participation in the host country, in particular around the host city of London. The study focuses on measuring the legacy effects a year after the games began. This research is being created to gain a greater understanding about how the 2012 Olympic games has affected the nation – London in particular.
or any similar topic only for you
With this information we also would like to make the results more specific and find out: how the Olympic legacy has inspired people and how distance of residency from the Olympic stadium ill affect their perceived perception of the games and finally what economic and social barriers may stand in the way of individuals becoming involved post- Olympic Games. METHODS DESIGN Data generation was carried out from the Opening Ceremony (27th July 2012) to exactly one year after the Opening Ceremony (27th July 2013). The approach taken was twofold, firstly a questionnaire was conducted.
The first method of this study uses a self-completion questionnaire to determine a link between the London 2012 Olympic Games and the perceived impact on sports participation across England. This allows participants to self-evaluate the impact of this event, and thus provides a subjective evaluation, but still shows an important social indicator. The questionnaire includes close-ended questions for easier completion and so respondents do not tire, and therefore a larger response is more likely making the data more representative.
The Likert scale will be used; respondent’s attitudes will be obtained by asking them to respond to a series of statements, in terms of the extent to which they agree with them, where 1 was ‘Strongly Disagree’ and 5 was ‘Strongly Agree’. The number of uestionnaire. Examples of positive statements are: ‘grassroots participation would be boosted. An already sports-mad nation would get fitter and healthier. ‘ (Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2010). And, ‘These champions and potential champions provide an important inspiration forothers to ‘have a gd. McKay, 1991). Examples of negative statements for use in the questionnaire are: sports organisations need to ensure that marketing is sensitive to consumer resistance arising from an awareness of how difficult it is to emulate our sporting heroes and heroines. ‘ (Hindson et al. 1994).
And, ‘It’s no good having a great Olympics in 2012 and inspiring many young people to take up sport if we don’t have the facilities, coaching and infrastructure to get them involved and keep them in sport. ‘ (Draper, 2003). Research conducted by Hindson et al. (1994) concluded that the Olympics had a positive effect on club membership. Conversely, Edcoms (2007) found no clear correlation between hosting the Olympic Games and sport participation as a long-term affect, however, may lead to short-term gains. The second part of the process involved another questionnaire. This part of the study involved obtaining socio-demographic information including age, gender and distance of residency from the Olympic Park, all of which could affect a residents perspective of the event.
Previous research has indicated that reactions could be based on these key factors (Twynam & Johnston, 2004). Research has indicated that in ethnic minorities, such as East London, barriers exist such as unaffordable facilities and unavailable childcare, high crime rates, fear for personal safety and culturally inappropriate activities are of primary importance and may influence willingness to articipate (Seefeldt et al. , 2002). The chosen technique to distribute the questionnaires was the ‘drop and collect’ method.
This involves the hand delivery and collection of the questionnaires, providing a cost effective, reliable and very fast method to complete this research. Respondents are able to complete the questionnaire at their own pace therefore are more likely to complete it. The technique avoids interviewer bias and control over the selection process.