Sport-related brain injury, or sport-concussion, is a recognized public-health concern that may influence participation in contact and collision sports. Broadcasted live sports reach large audiences and often include replays and commentary about on-field impacts. The decisions and framing used by broadcast commentary teams can shape public understanding of concussion identification and management. Prior analyses have identified inaccuracies and sensationalist framing in live commentary, and a small prior study suggested mixed public views with some differences by concussion history. The present study aimed to document public perceptions of concussion portrayal in televised sport commentary and to assess public support for recommendations to improve broadcast reporting.
Participants were volunteers recruited from the community and a major metropolitan university. Inclusion criteria were age ≥17 years, access to a computer or mobile device, and willingness to complete the survey in an appropriate environment. Advertisements were distributed by email, websites, and word of mouth. After quality checks and exclusions, the final sample comprised 163 participants.
Demographic and background items captured age, education, gender, concussion history, collision-sport participation, concussion education, and sports-media consumption (including rugby-league viewing frequency).
Perceptions were measured with two custom instruments:
The Perceptions of Sport-Concussion Media Portrayal (PoSCoMP) scale: 30 items using a 5-point agreement scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Nine items are reverse scored; higher summed scores indicate a more negative view of current media portrayal. Internal consistency in this sample was adequate (Cronbach’s α = .83).
The Perceptions of Accurate and Responsible Sport-Concussion Media Portrayal (PaRSCoMP) scale: 12 items derived from reporting guidelines (5-point agreement scale). Higher summed scores indicate stronger agreement with recommendations for accurate and responsible commentary. Internal consistency was adequate (Cronbach’s α = .83).
A stand-alone item asked whether there should be guidelines for sport commentators to help report injuries.
Ethics approval was granted by the Queensland University of Technology Human Research Ethics Committee. An online Qualtrics survey, including embedded instructional manipulation checks and a free-text comment box, ran between 15 May 2024 and 01 November 2024. Participants provided informed consent via the survey interface. Tokens of appreciation (prize draw entry or course credit where eligible) were offered.
Descriptive statistics characterized the sample and item responses. Items were coded as agreed perceptions when >50% of respondents selected agree or strongly agree. Independent-samples t-tests examined subgroup differences on PoSCoMP and PaRSCoMP total scores for factors such as concussion history, concussion education, collision-sport participation, and rugby-league viewing. No correction for multiple comparisons was applied; significance was set at α = 0.05. Analyses were performed in IBM SPSS Statistics v30.
The 163 participants were aged 17–55 years (mean = 22.58, SD = 7.2). Thirty-four participants (20.9%) reported a prior concussion, and of those, 64.7% reported their most recent concussion was acquired from sport. One hundred and six participants (65%) had played contact sport at some level. Approximately one third (n = 50) reported receiving concussion education; the remainder (n = 113) had not. Rugby-league viewing responses were split: 49 reported regular viewing and 113 reported never or rarely watching.
The mean PoSCoMP total score was 89.22 (SD = 12.86). Individual item means ranged from 1.93 (for the item that coverage is "important for player safety") to 3.94 (for the item that sport-concussion is "ignored in some sports"). Six PoSCoMP items met the >50% agreed-perception threshold. The most frequently endorsed agreed perceptions were:
Six items were identified as disagreed perceptions (>50% disagreed or strongly disagreed), including that current portrayal is important for player safety (78% disagreed), that portrayal turns people off watching sport (69% disagreed), and that concussion coverage is given too much attention (64% disagreed).
The mean PaRSCoMP total score was 49.89 (SD = 6.63). Ten of the 12 PaRSCoMP recommendations were endorsed by more than 50% of participants, indicating broad support for recommended reporting practices such as correct injury naming and prioritising player health. The two specific PaRSCoMP items that were not endorsed were not detailed in the provided source extract.
No statistically significant subgroup differences were observed on PoSCoMP or PaRSCoMP total scores by concussion history, concussion education, collision-sport participation, or rugby-league viewing in this sample.
Respondents in this study generally viewed live broadcast commentary about sport-concussion as in need of improvement and commonly perceived it as minimising or sometimes ignoring concussion. There was broad endorsement of recommended reporting practices, with most PaRSCoMP items supported. These findings align with concerns from prior qualitative and content-analytic work about inaccurate, sensationalist, or incomplete broadcast commentary on concussion. The lack of subgroup differences in this sample contrasts with some prior reports that found variation by concussion history; reasons for this difference are not clarified in the source extract.
The study reinforces that broadcast commentary is an influential source of information about concussion for wide audiences and that community members support changes to increase the accuracy and health-focus of that portrayal.
Members of the public in this sample endorse more accurate and responsible broadcast reporting of sport-concussion and support recommendations that prioritise player health in commentary. The authors suggest that improving the informative value of live sport broadcasts may help shape better public understanding and management of concussion.
Participant-level data are not publicly available due to confidentiality conditions imposed by the approving institution; data requests can be directed to the Queensland University of Technology Human Research Ethics Committee as described in the source article. The authors reported no specific funding for the work and declared no competing interests.
Note: The provided source text was truncated in the results section; specific details about the two PaRSCoMP items that were not endorsed and the standalone guideline item results were not reported in the available extract.