Grit is widely conceptualized as a personality trait reflecting sustained perseverance and consistent passion toward long-term goals (Duckworth et al., 2007). Individuals high in grit maintain effort despite challenges and remain committed to their objectives over extended periods. Recent sport psychology literature further emphasizes grit as a dynamic psychological resource that supports athletes’ resilience and long-term development in competitive environments (Lee and Oh, 2025; Mendizabal, 2024). Sports engagement, on the other hand, refers to athletes’ behavioral, emotional, and cognitive involvement in sports-related activities. It encompasses active participation in training, psychological investment in performance, and sustained commitment to the sport. Engagement is shaped not only by internal motivation but also by contextual and psychological factors that influence athletes’ willingness to invest effort (Larkin et al., 2023). In team sports such as sports, engagement is often conceptualized as a multidimensional construct reflecting both observable behaviors and underlying motivational states.

A growing body of empirical research has demonstrated a positive association between grit and sports-related engagement. First, gritty athletes tend to accumulate more deliberate practice hours and achieve higher performance levels, indicating that grit facilitates sustained behavioral engagement in sports. Larkin et al. (2023) found that grit significantly predicted skill development among elite youth soccer players beyond the effects of deliberate practice alone, suggesting that perseverance plays a unique role in maintaining long-term involvement. Second, grit has been shown to enhance psychological well-being among collegiate athletes, which in turn supports their engagement in sport. A recent study by Kovács (2025) reported that grit positively predicted autonomy, environmental mastery, and personal growth—psychological resources known to promote sustained participation and emotional investment in athletic activities. Third, gritty athletes demonstrate more adaptive responses to setbacks, such as injuries or performance failures. Qualitative findings indicate that individuals high in grit interpret obstacles as temporary challenges rather than reasons to disengage, thereby maintaining their commitment to sports participation (Cormier et al., 2025).

These empirical findings align with major motivational theories. Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986) posits that personal characteristics such as perseverance influence behavioral outcomes through self-regulatory mechanisms, explaining why gritty individuals remain engaged in sports despite difficulties. Self-Determination Theory (Deci and Ryan, 2000) further suggests that grit enhances perceived competence and autonomy, which strengthens intrinsic motivation and supports sustained engagement. Together, these theoretical perspectives and empirical results indicate that grit plays a central role in promoting sports engagement by fostering persistence, psychological resilience, and long-term motivational investment.

Hope is conceptualized as a cognitive–motivational construct composed of agency thinking and pathway thinking, which together enable individuals to pursue goals effectively (Snyder, 2002). Hope reflects one’s perceived capacity to generate routes toward desired goals and sustain the motivation to follow those routes. Recent sport psychology research further defines hope as a psychological resource that enhances athletes’ confidence in achieving performance outcomes and facilitates persistence in physical activity contexts (Blythe et al., 2025). Sports participation motivation refers to the internal and external motives that drive individuals to engage in sports activities. It encompasses intrinsic motives such as enjoyment and competence, as well as extrinsic motives such as social recognition or fitness goals. Contemporary studies describe participation motivation as a multidimensional construct that predicts sustained involvement and commitment in sport (Tao and Yu, 2025).

A substantial body of research supports the mediating role of hope in the relationship between grit and sport-related outcomes. Grit has been shown to positively predict hope, as individuals with higher perseverance and long-term goal orientation tend to exhibit stronger agency and pathway thinking. Longakit et al. (2025) demonstrated that both components of grit significantly predicted dispositional hope among student-athletes. Similarly, Blythe et al. (2025) found that hope-agency was strongly associated with long-term goal pursuit and physical activity engagement, suggesting that gritty individuals are more likely to develop higher levels of hope. In turn, hope has been identified as a significant predictor of sport engagement. Blythe et al. (2025) reported that higher hope-agency predicted vigorous physical activity and greater goal attainment, while Longakit et al. (2025) found that hope significantly predicted sports motivation, a known antecedent of sport engagement. These findings indicate that hope mediates the relationship between grit and sports engagement by enhancing athletes’ motivational and cognitive resources.

Sports participation motivation also functions as a mediator linking grit to sports engagement. Grit has been shown to enhance participation motivation, as gritty individuals are more likely to maintain high levels of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation toward sport. Longakit et al. (2025) found that grit was a strong predictor of student-athletes’ motivation toward sports, while Kovács (2025) reported that athletes with higher grit demonstrated stronger sport orientation and persistence—key components of participation motivation. Participation motivation, in turn, is a well-established predictor of sport engagement. Tao and Yu (2025) demonstrated that exercise motivation significantly predicted sport participation and commitment among college students, and Larkin et al. (2023) found that motivated athletes accumulated more deliberate practice hours and showed higher engagement in sports-related activities. These findings support the mediating role of participation motivation in the grit–engagement relationship.

Furthermore, evidence suggests that hope enhances participation motivation, supporting a sequential dual mediation pathway. Longakit et al. (2025) reported that hope significantly predicted sports motivation, indicating that hopeful athletes are more motivated to participate in sport. Blythe et al. (2025) similarly found that hope-agency predicted exercise goal attainment, which is closely related to participation motivation. These findings support a dual mediation model in which grit increases hope, which then enhances participation motivation, ultimately leading to higher sports engagement.

Taken together, the literature provides strong support for the dual mediating roles of hope and sports participation motivation. Grounded in Hope Theory (Snyder, 2002) and Self-Determination Theory (Deci and Ryan, 2000), this framework highlights the importance of cognitive–motivational processes in explaining how grit influences sports engagement among university students.

Peer relationships constitute a critical social context influencing university students’ psychological development, motivation, and sport-related behaviors. In sport settings, peer relationships are commonly defined as the quality of interpersonal interactions, emotional support, acceptance, and social connectedness experienced among teammates or peers (Wentzel, 2017). High-quality peer relationships provide athletes with encouragement, belongingness, and positive feedback, which can enhance motivation and engagement. Conversely, negative peer dynamics—such as conflict, exclusion, or social comparison—can undermine psychological well-being and reduce motivation (Prinstein and Dodge, 2008). Thus, peer relationships function as a multidimensional social factor capable of exerting both facilitative and detrimental influences on athletes’ cognitive and motivational processes.

From a theoretical standpoint, Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986) posits that personal factors, environmental influences, and behaviors interact reciprocally. Within this framework, peer relationships serve as an environmental factor that can strengthen or weaken the translation of personal traits (e.g., grit) into cognitive–motivational outcomes (e.g., hope, participation motivation). Similarly, Self-Determination Theory (Deci and Ryan, 2000) emphasizes the importance of relatedness as a basic psychological need; supportive peer environments enhance intrinsic motivation, whereas negative peer interactions can frustrate this need and diminish motivation. These theoretical perspectives suggest that peer relationships may moderate the pathways through which grit influences hope, participation motivation, and ultimately sports engagement.

Empirical evidence supports the moderating role of peer relationships in sport and academic contexts. Positive peer relationship has been shown to enhance motivation, emotional well-being, and engagement. For example, Wentzel (2017) found that supportive peer interactions promoted academic motivation and adaptive functioning, highlighting the motivational benefits of positive peer environments. In sport settings, peer relationship has been linked to increased enjoyment, persistence, and engagement, suggesting that peers can reinforce athletes’ motivational processes (Smith et al., 2016). These findings imply that when peer relationships are positive, gritty individuals may experience stronger hope and higher participation motivation, thereby increasing sports engagement.

However, research also indicates that peer relationships can exert negative or suppressive effects. Prinstein and Dodge (2008) demonstrated that peer conflict, pressure, and negative social comparison can undermine adolescents’ psychological adjustment and motivation. Rose and Asher (2017) similarly reported that peer difficulties, such as exclusion or relational stress, negatively affected youths’ emotional functioning and goal pursuit. In sport contexts, negative peer dynamics have been associated with reduced motivation, lower enjoyment, and disengagement (Smith et al., 2016). These findings suggest that when peer relationships are poor, the positive effects of grit on hope and participation motivation may be weakened, thereby diminishing sports engagement.

Taken together, the literature indicates that peer relationships may function as a moderating factor that either strengthens or suppresses the indirect effects of grit on sports engagement through hope and participation motivation. Positive peer environments may amplify the motivational benefits of grit, whereas negative peer dynamics may inhibit the development of hope and reduce participation motivation. This dual potential underscores the importance of examining peer relationships as a contextual moderator within the broader motivational framework of sports engagement among university students.

The research model was developed based on prior empirical and theoretical studies to examine whether peer relationship moderates the sequential associations among grit, hope, sports participation motivation, and sports engagement. To assess this moderated mediation pattern, Model 83 of the SPSS PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2017) was employed. Grit was specified as the independent variable, sports engagement as the outcome variable, and hope and sports participation motivation as sequential mediators. Peer relationship was included as a moderator of the association between grit and hope. Gender and age were statistically controlled to account for potential confounding variables. The conceptual model is illustrated in Figure 1.

To enhance geographic diversity, a multistage sampling strategy was employed. Five provinces representing eastern, western, southern, northern, and central China were selected, followed by the random selection of one city per province. Within each city, one higher education institution offering physical education or sports-related programs was purposively chosen to ensure ecological relevance to organized sport participation contexts.

A total of 625 students (125 per institution) were invited to participate. Institutional-level recruitment used convenience sampling, targeting students enrolled in sports classes or actively participating in sports clubs. Of the 625 invited students, 38 were automatically excluded prior to survey access through an online eligibility filter (not enrolled in sports classes or sports clubs). The remaining 587 eligible students accessed the survey, of whom 78 discontinued before completion. A total of 509 participants completed the questionnaire and were included in the final analysis, yielding an overall completion rate of 81.4%.

The survey platform required responses to all items, resulting in no missing data. No duplicate entries were detected, and no cases were excluded based on response time or quality-control criteria. Accordingly, all 509 completed questionnaires constituted the final analytic sample.

Participants provided electronic informed consent prior to survey access and were informed of their right to withdraw at any time. The study received ethical approval from the Institutional Review Board of Hanseo University (Approval No. HS25-12-01).

The final sample (N = 509) comprised 72.5% male and 27.5% female students, with a mean age of 18.9 years. First-year students accounted for 60.9% of the sample.

Grit was measured using the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S) developed by Duckworth and Quinn (2009), which comprises two theoretically derived subdimensions: Consistency of Interest and Perseverance of Effort. Each subscale includes four items, resulting in a total of eight items. Of the eight items, four (Items 1–4) were reverse-coded prior to composite score computation. Higher composite scores indicate greater levels of grit. Participants responded using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

To examine construct validity, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted. Principal axis factoring with Varimax rotation was employed for the EFA. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin value (0.806) and Bartlett’s test of sphericity (χ² = 2474.356, p < 0.001) indicated adequate sampling adequacy. The EFA yielded a clear two-factor solution consistent with the original conceptualization of grit. All items loaded above 0.50 on their respective factors, and no problematic cross-loadings were observed (primary–secondary loading differences ≥0.15).

A subsequent CFA confirmed the two-factor structure. All standardized factor loadings exceeded 0.50, and the model demonstrated acceptable fit indices: χ²(4) = 15.469, p < 0.001; χ²/df = 3.867; GFI = 0.993; TLI = 0.967; CFI = 0.995; RMSEA = 0.075. The correlation between Perseverance of Effort and Consistency of Interest was moderate to substantial (r = 0.641), indicating meaningful relatedness while supporting the distinguishability of the two subdimensions.

Given this empirical structure, grit was retained as a two-factor construct in the measurement model. However, consistent with prior research that has operationalized grit as a general psychological strength using composite scores (e.g., Duckworth et al., 2007; Duckworth and Quinn, 2009; Credé et al., 2017), and in line with the study’s focus on overall perseverance-related functioning, a composite grit score was used in subsequent structural analyses. This approach preserves the multidimensional measurement structure while enabling parsimonious modeling of overall grit.

Convergent validity and reliability were evaluated based on the validated measurement structure. The average variance extracted (AVE) was 0.661, and composite reliability (CR) was 0.978. Internal consistency reliability was satisfactory (McDonald’s ω = 0.978; Cronbach’s α = 0.873), exceeding commonly recommended thresholds.

To assess the potential threat of common method bias (CMB), both procedural and statistical remedies were implemented. Procedurally, the study ensured respondent anonymity and varied the order of items across constructs to mitigate evaluation apprehension and reduce consistency motives—standard practices known to minimize the likelihood of bias.

To statistically address the potential influence of common method variance, a latent method factor model was tested by linking an unmeasured method factor to all observed indicators. This model showed slightly better fit indices (χ²/df = 5.073, CFI = 0.794, TLI = 0.779, RMSEA = 0.090) than the baseline measurement model (χ²/df = 6.487, CFI = 0.713, TLI = 0.702, RMSEA = 0.104).

While these changes indicate a potential presence of method effects, the overall model fit remained suboptimal, and the observed improvements in fit (ΔCFI < 0.10; ΔRMSEA < 0.02) did not exceed commonly accepted thresholds for meaningful change (Cheung and Rensvold, 2002). Therefore, any inferences about method variance should be made cautiously and considered preliminary.

Given these findings, caution is warranted in concluding that CMB poses no threat. Instead of relying solely on statistical controls, greater emphasis is placed on the procedural strategies adopted in the research design, which likely played a more critical role in mitigating method bias. Nevertheless, the presence of some residual method variance cannot be ruled out entirely and should be acknowledged as a potential limitation.

Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 25.0), AMOS (Version 23.0), and the SPSS PROCESS macro (Version 4.2; Hayes, 2017). Frequency analyses, reliability testing (McDonald’s ω), exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and measurement model analyses were conducted to evaluate the psychometric properties of the instruments. To assess potential common method bias, a common method factor analysis was performed.

For the analysis of moderated mediation pattern, PROCESS Model 83 was applied, allowing for the testing of conditional indirect effects in the presence of moderators. Bootstrapping procedures with 5,000 resamples and a 95% bias-corrected confidence interval were employed to determine the significance of the effects. Additionally, independent and moderator variable were mean-centered to minimize potential multicollinearity in the moderation and moderated mediation analyses. The conditional effects and conditional indirect effects were examined at three levels of the moderator: one standard deviation below the mean (M − 1SD), the mean (M), and one standard deviation above the mean (M + 1SD).

The results of the Pearson bivariate correlation analysis among the study variables are presented in Table 1. Hope, peer relationship, sports participation motivation, and sports engagement were all significantly and positively correlated with one another. In contrast, grit was significantly and negatively correlated with peer relationship, suggesting an inverse association between these two variables. In addition, the correlation coefficients among the independent variables were all below 0.70, suggesting that multicollinearity was not a concern in subsequent analyses (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2019).

In the descriptive statistical analysis, all variables demonstrated values above the median. Among them, sports participation motivation showed the highest mean score (M = 4.1373).

To examine whether peer relationship moderates the serial mediation association of hope and sports participation motivation in the association between grit and sports engagement, the SPSS PROCESS macro (Model 83; Hayes, 2017) was employed. Grit and peer relationship were mean-centered prior to analysis, and gender and age were included as control variables. The results are presented in Figures 2, 3 and Tables 2, 3.

Grit exerted a significant positive effect on hope (B = 0.4447, p < 0.001). In turn, hope (M2) significantly predicted sports participation motivation (M2) (B = 0.8491, p < 0.001), which subsequently had a significant positive effect on sports engagement (B = 0.3588, p < 0.001). However, grit did not have a significant direct effect on sports engagement (B = −0.0239, p > 0.05). These findings indicate that hope and sports participation motivation fully and sequentially mediated the relationship between grit and sports engagement.

The interaction between grit and peer relationship significantly predicted hope (B = −0.2760, p < 0.001), demonstrating that peer relationship moderated the effect of grit on hope by attenuating its positive influence. The change in explained variance was statistically significant (ΔR² = 0.0633, F = 50.5650, p < 0.001), indicating that the inclusion of the interaction term meaningfully improved the model.

Conditional effects analysis further confirmed this moderating pattern. Although the conditional effects of grit on hope were significant at all three tested levels of the moderator, the magnitude of the effect decreased as peer relationship increased from M − 1 SD to M + 1 SD. This pattern suggests that peer relationship functions as a suppressor, weakening the positive association between grit and hope.

The Johnson–Neyman technique was applied to identify the region of significance for the conditional effect. The effect of grit on hope remained significant when peer relationship values were below 1.2130, a range that included 96.3% of the participants. Conversely, when peer relationship values were 1.2130 or higher, the conditional effect was not significant, representing 3.7% of the sample.

The significant conditional effect is illustrated in Figure 3. Overall, hope increased as grit increased; however, the slope was steeper for individuals with low levels of peer relationship, whereas the increase was more gradual for those with high levels of peer relationship.

Next, to examine the moderated mediation effect of grit on sports engagement, both direct and conditional indirect effects were analyzed. The direct effect of grit on sports engagement was not significant (B = −0.0239, 95% CI [−0.1051, 0.0573], p > 0.05).

Subsequently, the conditional indirect effect of peer relationship was tested in the pathway from grit to sports engagement through hope and sports participation motivation. The conditional indirect effects were significant at all three levels of the moderator (M − 1 SD, M, and M + 1 SD), indicating that the indirect effect of grit on sports engagement varied depending on the level of peer relationship. Moreover, as peer relationship increased from M − 1 SD to M + 1 SD, the magnitude of the conditional indirect effect decreased, demonstrating a weakening pattern.

The index of moderated mediation for peer relationship was B = −0.0841, and the 95% bootstrap confidence interval did not include zero (−0.1308 to −0.0465), confirming that the conditional indirect effect was statistically significant.