Psychiatry · Medical Literature
Martial arts training and aggressive behavior in children and adolescents: a systematic review of longitudinal evidence and psychological processes.
Abstract
Aggressive behavior in childhood and adolescence represents a persistent developmental and public health concern, with important implications for psychosocial adjustment and long-term wellbeing. Martial arts training, which typically integrates structured physical activity with rule-based interaction, discipline, and social learning, has increasingly been proposed as a potential intervention context for shaping behavioral and emotional development. However, longitudinal evidence regarding its relationship with youth aggression remains fragmented and heterogeneous. This systematic review synthesized longitudinal intervention studies examining the relationship between martial arts training and changes in aggressive behavior among children and adolescents. A comprehensive search of international and Chinese databases identified 11 eligible studies, including two randomized controlled trials and nine quasi-experimental intervention studies. Methodological quality was assessed using the RoB 2 tool for randomized trials and the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for quasi-experimental studies. Overall, the evidence does not indicate a consistent directional effect of martial arts interventions on aggressive behavior. Instead, findings varied substantially across martial arts disciplines, intervention structures, and research contexts. Across studies, psychological variables relevant to potential psychological processes were mainly represented in two domains: (1) self-regulation-related processes, including self-control and emotion-related indicators; and (2) socialization-related constructs, including self-concept, peer-related indicators, and broader psychosocial functioning. However, considerable variation existed in the conceptualization and measurement of these variables, limiting direct comparability across studies and preventing firm conclusions about causal mechanisms. Taken together, martial arts training should not be interpreted as having a uniform aggression-reducing effect among children and adolescents. Its potential value appears conditional on educational goals, pedagogical guidance, and training context. Future research should clarify when, for whom, and through what pathways martial arts training may influence aggression-related outcomes.
Clinical relevance
Does longitudinal martial arts training produce a consistent directional effect on aggressive behavior in children and adolescents, and what psychological processes may mediate this relationship? __SNAPSHOT__ {"studyDesign":"Systematic review of longitudinal intervention studies (narrative synthesis without meta-analysis); PRISMA 2020-compliant","setting":"International and Chinese databases searched (including CNKI and Wanfang); no single clinical setting — multi-national scope","sampleSize":"11 eligible studies included (2 randomized controlled trials; 9 quasi-experimental intervention studies); aggregate participant N not reported in abstract or retrieved full-text excerpts","population":"Children and adolescents enrolled in martial arts training programs; specific age ranges, baseline aggression levels, and clinical diagnoses varied across included studies","intervention":"Martial arts training programs (disciplines included judo, karate, taekwondo, Chinese traditional martial arts, jiu-jitsu, aikido, and modern martial arts programs); program duration, frequency, and instructor qualifications varied across studies","comparator":"Varied across studies; not uniformly reported — some studies used inactive controls, some used active comparators or pre-test/post-test within-group designs","primaryOutcome":"Changes in aggressive behavior (operationalized heterogeneously across studies using instruments including the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire, Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, Violent Behavior at School Scale, STAXI-NA, and others); secondary psychological constructs included self-control, emotion regulation, self-concept, peer relations, and psychosocial functioning","followUp":"Not reported uniformly; varied across included studies","fundingSource":"Not reported in abstract or retrieved full-text excerpts"}
Key findings
Across 11 longitudinal intervention studies, the relationship between martial arts training and aggressive behavior in youth showed no stable or consistent directional pattern. Some studies reported reductions in aggression-related outcomes following martial arts interventions, particularly in the domain of physical aggression, while other studies observed no significant intervention effect, and still others reported increases in aggression or hostility under specific training forms or contexts. Among disciplines with a relatively larger number of included studies, judo demonstrated substantial outcome heterogeneity, with some studies reporting reductions and others reporting increases or null effects. Findings for karate and taekwondo appeared somewhat more directionally consistent, but the limited number of studies per discipline precluded firm conclusions. Disciplines represented by only a single study (Chinese traditional martial arts, jiu-jitsu, aikido, modern martial arts programs) yielded only exploratory evidence. Pooled effect sizes, confidence intervals, p-values, NNT, and NNH are not reported, as this review employed narrative rather than quantitative synthesis. Psychological variables identified across studies fell into two primary domains: (1) self-regulation-related processes (self-control, emotion-related indicators) and (2) socialization-related constructs (self-concept, peer-related indicators, broader psychosocial functioning). However, the review explicitly notes that considerable variation in the conceptualization and measurement of these variables limits direct comparability and prevents firm conclusions about causal mechanisms. No adverse events specific to training were reported in the retrieved excerpts.
Practice implications
This systematic review establishes that the existing longitudinal evidence base is insufficient to conclude that martial arts training consistently reduces aggressive behavior in children and adolescents. The study did not establish the direction, magnitude, or mechanism of any effect. Findings varied substantially across martial arts disciplines, intervention structures, and research contexts, precluding generalizable practice recommendations. The population to whom findings apply is broad (school-age children and adolescents in structured martial arts programs) but internally heterogeneous; children with specific clinical diagnoses (e.g., conduct disorder, ADHD, autism spectrum disorder) and those from non-East-Asian cultural contexts were not adequately or consistently represented. The review's narrative synthesis design, driven by cross-study heterogeneity in outcome measures and intervention structures, means no pooled effect estimate is available, which substantially limits the precision of any clinical inference. The PROSPERO registration was retrospective (30 January 2026) and should be interpreted as a transparency measure rather than as prospective protocol registration, which increases the risk of reporting bias. Only the abstract was available to the submitting clinician; the full-text PDF was accessed via search and informs this summary, but completeness of data extraction from that source cannot be guaranteed. Practice should not change on the basis of this review alone; it serves primarily to map the evidence landscape and identify the need for adequately powered, prospectively registered RCTs with standardized outcome measurement. __LIMITATIONS__ Small number of included studies (n=11) with heterogeneous designs — only 2 RCTs, 9 quasi-experimental studies — severely limits causal inference,Retrospective PROSPERO registration introduces risk of post-hoc outcome selection and reporting bias,Narrative rather than quantitative synthesis precludes pooled effect estimation, NNT/NNH calculation, or formal assessment of publication bias,Marked heterogeneity in martial arts disciplines, training intensity, session duration, instructor qualifications, and follow-up duration across included studies prevents meaningful cross-study comparisons,Outcome measure heterogeneity (multiple non-equivalent aggression scales across studies) limits direct comparability; standardized effect sizes not calculable,Absence of blinding in quasi-experimental designs increases risk of performance and detection bias; RoB 2 and JBI appraisal tools applied, but overall quality of the evidence base is not reported as high,Potential cultural generalizability concerns: inclusion of Chinese-language databases (CNKI, Wanfang) may produce a sample skewed toward East Asian cultural and training contexts, limiting applicability to Western clinical populations,Aggregate participant N not reported; individual study sample sizes likely small, underpowering detection of modest intervention effects,Psychological mediators (self-regulation, socialization constructs) were measured inconsistently across studies, preventing mechanistic conclusions,Several martial arts disciplines (jiu-jitsu, aikido, Chinese traditional martial arts) were each represented by only a single study, rendering discipline-specific inference exploratory at best,Funding source not reported, precluding assessment of potential commercial or institutional conflicts of interest __BOTTOM_LINE_CATEGORY__ low_certainty __BOTTOM_LINE__ This systematic review of 11 longitudinal studies — only 2 of which were RCTs — found no consistent directional effect of martial arts training on aggressive behavior in children and adolescents; outcomes varied substantially by discipline, intervention structure, and study context. The evidence base is too small, heterogeneous, and methodologically limited to support practice recommendations for or against martial arts as a behavioral intervention for youth aggression. Adequately powered, prospectively registered RCTs with standardized outcome measures across diverse populations are required before clinical guidance can be offered.