Jumping on a Trampoline and Risk Behavior – Injuries&Wounds Example

Download free paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

"Jumping on a Trampoline and Risk Behavior" is a perfect example of a paper on Injuries and Wounds. Trampolines have over the past two decades or so become a popular source of entertainment for children, especially with parents wanting to minimize the time spent on screens. Au contraire, just like any other outside activity, trampoline use is positively related to injuries among children. The injuries which result from the use of trampolines tend to vary in severity, with the most common being place high on the extremities scales (Skwarecki, 2018). Scholars and practitioners alike argue that children who are prone to injuries caused by trampolines are accustomed to risk-taking behavior (Moyer, 2017; Skwarecki, 2018).

The pragmatic definition of this behavioral tendency is one that is consciously or unconsciously controlled, with the individual having a perceived uncertainty about the result (Child Safety Link, 2019). The subsequent essay explores the connection between trampoline use and risk behavior under the auspice of the thesis that parents have to monitor their children when placing in a bid to mitigate the occurrence of injuries. Problem StatementAs a parent, one is oft required to create a safe and conducive environment for their children, which will not constrain but rather accentuate their growth.

In order to do this, some parents have resorted to outdoor activities such as backyard trampolines. Child Safety Links (2019) highlights that trampolines have gained widespread attention since they were originally developed in the 1950s. The playtime devices oft operate by contracting and expanding whenever a person jumps on it in order to provide a bounce effect (Rao, McFaull, Cheesman, Do, Purcell, & Thompson, 2019; Child Safety Link, 2019).

The contraction and expansion mechanisms are controlled through the use of springs, which are connected to a strong frame. In addition, the trampolines are fitted with beds that contain low tensile strength used to provide a softer bounce with less pressure on the joints. The key issue with trampoline use is that children are not cognizant of the risk that comes with bouncing on the low tensile bed. This is because they are focused highly on the endorphin flow that comes with jumping up and down. Adults are, however, more aware of the risk ergo they have to control the behaviors of their children and drill into their heads the dangers.

Child Safety Links (2019) argue that trampoline-related injuries result in about a hundred thousand emergency department visits on an annual basis. A great chunk of the injuries occurs at home or at a neighbor's house. The injuries caused by the trampolines are severe compared to others, with the severity being exacerbated by the fact that the users are young children. Child Safety Links (2019) exposit that 40% of the injuries are largely dislocations/ fractures with more serious injuries, including damage to the spinal cord or skull.

Chronic repetitive changes, as well as an early combination of the growth plates in the bones of the children, may occur due to the axial forces emanating from the trampolines (Child Safety Link, 2019). The modus operandi or causes of the injuries is caused by: • Improper landing on the springs, frame, or mat; • Landing on the ground/cement rather than the trampoline mat; • Colliding with another person. In lieu of the preceding problem statement, this research presents the question of whether jumping on a trampoline is a form of risk behavior.

The research question sets up the foundation to test the hypothesis that, indeed, trampolines are a primal form of risk behavior. This is because children unconsciously know that the trampoline might tear or even they might collide with another person, but they would rather get hurt if it means being satisfied (Rao, McFaull, Cheesman, Do, Purcell, & Thompson, 2019). Research Design & Measurement InstrumentA quantitative research design was implemented to test the research question and hypothesis.

The research design was descriptive by nature, whereby the subjects would be measured only once. The author chose this type of research design because it deals with logic, numbers, and an objective stance. In as well, it focuses on detailed data that is determined and analyzed by convergent reasoning. The research took the form of a quantitative survey whereby the respondents were asked objective questioned aimed at gaining detailed insights about the research topic. The quantitative design was further backed by the use of a risk-taking scale. The primary purpose of the risk-taking scale is to measure how people resolve decisions that involve risk and uncertainty.

The scale further describes the differences in risk attitude and distinguishes them based on subject characteristics like age or gender. The application of the scale was conducted in light of the expected utility framework as well as prospect theory. The two highlight that the differences in risk attitude are oft modeled through the use of utility functions that range in shape. The functions contain divergent degrees of convexity, which explain risk-seeking or aversion.

Addendum to this, risk attitude is important as it distinguishes between the utility functions of divergent individuals. The attitude has to be used as nothing more than a convex or concave utility function to describe the individual. The scale further allowed the researcher to assess both traditional risk attitudes and perceived risk attitudes. The former is defined as the reported level of risk-taking, while the latter is the willingness of an individual to engage in the activity even though they are consciously aware of the risks. The independent variable used in the scale is the trampoline, while the dependent variable is risk-taking. (a) Data CollectionThe researcher identified a sample population of 20 people as the best fit to explore the research question.

The sample comprised of people from both genders, which would help in determining risk-taking behaviors and perceptions between males and females. The only inclusion criterion for the sample populace is that they had to understand English and be above the age of 18 years. Data Analysis. The answers derived from the objective questions on whether there is a relationship between trampolines and risky behavior were analyzed and classified into yes or no responses.

The reason for choosing the objective questions and answers is because it would help the researchers quantify the perception of the respondents on trampolines. Table 1 below highlights the data collected from the research: Yes No17 3Table 1: Subject responsesEthical ConsiderationsPrior to starting the research, the respondents were notified of the state and nature of the topic. The researcher provided them with a form that declared that they were okay with their responses being used in the research. The form was then submitted to the university committee on ethics for future reference. LimitationsUnfortunately, there were no limitations identified when conducting the survey.

The only issue raised is that there is an existent dearth of knowledge on the topic. This was, however, addressed by using sports-based research that focuses on risk-taking behavior. Results and Summary (mean averages)As opined prior, at least 20 respondents were used for the study who presented their perception on trampolines and risk behavior. 17 of the subjects considered the sports equipment to be a primal form of risk behavior while the remaining three argued that there is no positive correlation.

The responses from the 17 are backed by research, which notes that backyard trampolines have caused a surge in injuries from 2012 through to 2016, as shown in figure 1 below (Rao, McFaull, Cheesman, Do, Purcell, & Thompson, 2019). In addition, the hospital admission rates have increased because parents are buying more trampolines for their children without understanding the risk that is attached (Rao, McFaull, Cheesman, Do, Purcell, & Thompson, 2019). Most of the injured children oft do backflips or other dangerous stunts as they deem the trampolines to be safe because their parents approved of them (Rao, McFaull, Cheesman, Do, Purcell, & Thompson, 2019). Figure 1: Trampoline injuriesSource: (Rao, McFaull, Cheesman, Do, Purcell, & Thompson, 2019)In summation, the research confirms the correlation between trampolines and risky behavior.

The independent and dependent variables were tested through the use of a risk-taking behavior scale with the data showing a spike in injuries due to a lack of awareness. Recommendations from the paper call on future researchers to explore whether risk behavior in parents can be replicated on children consciously or unconsciously.


Child Safety Link. (2019). Trampoline Injuries (Backyard & Trampoline Parks). Retrieved July 4, 2020, from childsafetylink.ca: https://childsafetylink.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Trampoline-Injuries-final-JULY-3-2019.pdf

Moyer, F.(2017).Think Again Before Letting Your Kid on a Trampoline.Slate.com July 17, 2017

Rao, D. P., McFaull, S. R., Cheesman, J., Do, M. T., Purcell, L. K., & Thompson, W. (2019). The ups and downs of trampolines: Injuries associated with backyard trampolines and trampoline parks. Paediatrics Child Health.

Skwarecki,B.(2018).How Dangerous Are Trampolines Really?.vitals.lifehaker.com August 29,2018

Download free paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us