For clubs, coaches, parents and press · page 1 of 3
The science behind SSTracker
Designed around the research. Every choice below comes from published research on what keeps young athletes playing, growing and enjoying their sport. We have not yet measured whether SSTracker itself improves those outcomes, and we do not claim it. Surveys show links, not causes, and findings that have not replicated are marked Mixed.
01 · Evidence: Moderate
Every child is compared only with their own past
Research. Motivation lasts when children feel capable; mastery-focused settings go with more enjoyment and less anxiety. 28.6% of former players named “I’m not good enough” as a part they liked least (Aspen 2026).
In SSTracker. My progress, the growth chart and personal bests show a child only against their own past. Levels name a journey, never a rank.
02 · Evidence: Moderate
No leaderboards, and no child set against another
Research. 18% of former players felt compared by parents, against 13% of current players; among former players, 25% of girls and 9% of boys (Aspen 2026). Comparison climates go with more anxiety.
In SSTracker. Team goals are one shared bar with no names. Test results are never sorted or compared. Standings rank teams, never children.
03 · Evidence: Mixed
Feedback names effort and strategy, not talent
Research. Praise for effort, not intelligence, helped children cope with setbacks in lab studies. Mixed: later replications and growth-mindset meta-analyses found small or no effects.
In SSTracker. Coach’s pick and Seen it name a child’s effort; parent goals count effort, never scores. We do not claim it changes mindset.
04 · Evidence: Early
A coach’s notes about mistakes are never shown to the child
Research. Players of coaches trained to encourage and teach after mistakes dropped out less the next season, 5% against 26% (one small, non-random study).
In SSTracker. A coach’s notes about a child’s mistakes are never shown to the child; coaches get focus skills with drills to try.