Identifying and prioritizing selection indicators for elite women's badminton singles players: An analytic hierarchy process approach based on Delphi findings
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2026
Identifying and prioritizing selection indicators for elite women's badminton singles players: An analytic hierarchy process approach based on Delphi findings
Selecting elite youth athletes requires evaluating their current performance and future potential. In badminton, performance determinants differ according to event type and sex, making it essential to establish systematic evidence-based selection criteria. This study aimed to prioritize selection indicators for elite women's single badminton players using expert consensus through Analytic Hierarchy Process. Thirteen badminton experts participated in an Analytic Hierarchy Process survey to assess the relative importance of the indicators across three hierarchical levels. At the primary level, Anthropometric factors (0.58) ranked higher than Motor-performance factors (0.42). At the secondary level, Body Composition (0.47) was the highest within Anthropometric factors, whereas Physical strength (0.76) ranked highest in Motor-performance factors. At the tertiary level, Skeletal muscle mass (0.40), Thigh circumference (0.36), and Height (0.42) were prioritized for Anthropometric factors, whereas Agility (0.28) and Visual ability (0.63) were prioritized for Motor-performance factors. These findings provide objective, prioritized criteria for evaluating and selecting elite women's single players, supporting a more transparent and tailored identification process. This approach may serve as a foundation for developing selection systems that reflect event- and sex-specific demands in badminton.
MunirogluSSubakE. An overview of the important points of talent selection in sports. Res Investig Sportsmed2018; 3: 222–225.
2.
BarracloughSTillKKerrA, et al.Methodological approaches to talent identification in team sports: a narrative review. Sports (Basel)2022; 10: 81.
3.
SladeKJowettSRhindD. Developing guidelines for selection-deselection in high performance sport for athletes, coaches, and organisations: a delphi study. J Sports Sci2024; 42: 1209–1223.
4.
GuiY. Enhancing physical education analytics: an analytic hierarchy process-based approach for college sport. IEEE Access2025; 13: 40317–40330.
5.
Albaladejo-SauraMVaquero-CristóbalRGonzález-GálvezN, et al.Relationship between biological maturation, physical fitness, and kinanthropometric variables of young athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health2021; 18: 28.
6.
JohnstonKWattieNSchorerJ, et al.Talent identification in sport: a systematic review. Sports Med2018; 48: 97–109.
7.
JoEHOhSE. Exploring decision indicators for selecting elite players in youth male singles badminton: based on anthropometric indicators. J Mens Health2024; 1: 10.
8.
PinderRARenshawIDavidsK. The role of representative design in talent development: a comment on ‘talent identification and promotion programmes of Olympic athletes’. J Sports Sci2013; 31: 803–806.
9.
ZhangLTongdecharoenWTasnainaN. Development of a comprehensive test for talent identification in Chinese youth racewalking athletes. IJSASR2024; 4: 311–330.
10.
PhomsouphaMLaffayeG. The science of badminton: game characteristics, anthropometry, physiology, visual fitness and biomechanics. Sports Med2015; 45: 473–495.
11.
RamanDNageswaranA. Effect of game-specific strength training on selected physiological variables among badminton players. SSB, Int J Sci Res2013; 2: 1–10.
12.
HellerJ. Physiological profiles of elite badminton players: aspects of age and gender. Br J Sports Med2010; 44: i17.1–i1i17.
13.
PingWNiuXbin ZainuddinZA. Identification of male’s badminton talents: a systematic review. X. Fizioter pol2024; 24: 304–315.
14.
KimD-MSungB-J. The comparison of physical fitness in game type, game level and gender difference of the elite high school badminton player. Korean J Phys Educ2021; 60: 639–649.
15.
BaekSWOhDJKimJW. Impact of the type of badminton games on players’ physique and physical strength. Korea J Sports Sci2016; 25: 1433–1440.
16.
SungB-JChoK-HEunsookS, et al.Comparison of fitness levels based on gender and single and double national badminton player candidate. Korean J Meas Eval Phys Educ Sports Sci2016; 18: 1–11.
17.
RaKMParkJ-HJoEH. Estimating the determinants of winner and defeat through performance analysis of badminton single: application of decision tree analysis based on data mining. Korean J Meas Eval Phys Educ Sports Sci2020; 22: 49–62.
18.
ChiminazzoJGCBarreiraJLuzLSM, et al.Technical and timing characteristics of badminton men’s single: comparison between groups and play-offs stages in 2016 rio Olympic games. Int J Perform Anal Sport2018; 18: 245–254.
19.
GomezMALeichtASRivasF, et al.Long rallies and next rally performances in elite men’s and women’s badminton. PLOS One2020; 15: e0229604.
20.
SharmaR. Preferred leadership behaviours of male and female badminton players. Int J Sci Cult Sport2015; 3: 73–83.
21.
KaynarÖBiliciF. Examination of talent selection methods in different sports branches. J Educ Train Stud2018; 6: 44–48.
22.
BispoMDCAntonio Almeida-SantosMCarlos GomesA, et al.Establishing the validity of ‘sports talent®’: a methodology for motor talent detection in sports. Retos2024; 59: 1140–1148; status.
23.
YangJ. Evaluation of large-scale sports project based on analytic hierarchy process. Mob Inf Syst2021; 2021: 1–10.
24.
HuangHCLinCTHuCS. Analysis of selection indicators of badminton players by the delphi method and analytic hierarchy process. Int J Comput Sci Inf Technol2015; 7: 19–31.
25.
YeBZhuHYangZ, et al.Construction and analysis of the physical fitness evaluation index system for elite male singles badminton players: based on delphi and AHP methods. Life (Basel)2024; 14: 44.
26.
JoEH. Exploration of selection factors for female singles badminton players: based on body type and physical fitness. Korean J Meas Eval Phys Educ Sports Sci2024; 26: 73–82.
27.
OkoliCPawlowskiSD. The delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inf Manag2004; 42: 15–29.
28.
SaatyRW. The analytic hierarchy process – what it is and how it is used. Math Model1987; 9: 161–176.
SakuraiSOhtsukiT. Muscle activity and accuracy of performance of the smash stroke in badminton with reference to skill and practice. J Sports Sci2000; 18: 901–914.
31.
WiriawanORusdiawanAKusumaDA, et al.Unilateral hamstring muscle strengthening exercises can improve hamstring asymmetry and increase jumping performance in sub-elite badminton athletes. Retos2024; 54: 761–770.
32.
Almeida-NetoPFDMatosDGBaxter-JonesADG, et al.The effectiveness of biological maturation and lean mass in relation to muscle strength performance in elite young athletes. Sustainability2020; 12: 6696.
33.
YunYKKimWBLimTH. Analytic hierarchy process to examine factors influencing sports performance, (Vol. 17). Korean Society of Sport Psychology, pp. 1–12, 2006.
34.
JeyaramanRDistrictENaduT. Prediction of playing ability in badminton from selected anthropometrical physical and physiological characteristics among inter collegiate players. Int J Adv Innov Res2012; 2: 11.
35.
LiQDingH. Construction of the structural equation model of badminton players’ variable direction ability and its enlightenment to sports training. Ann Palliat Med2021; 10: 4623–4631.
36.
SinghJRazaSMohammadA. Physical characteristics and level of performance in badminton: a relationship study. J Educ Pract2011; 2: 6–10.
37.
TiwariLMRaiVSrinetS. Relationship of selected motor fitness components with the performance of badminton player. Asian J Phys Educ Comput Sci Sports2011; 5: 88–91.
38.
BańkoszZNawaraHOciepaM. Assessment of simple reaction time in badminton players. TRENDS in Sport Sciences2013; 1: 54–61.
39.
DelextratACohenD. Strength, power, speed, and agility of women basketball players according to playing position. J Strength Cond Res2009; 23: 1974–1981.
40.
Fernández-RomeroJJSuárezHVCancelaJM. Anthropometric analysis and performance characteristics to predict selection in young male and female handball players. Motriz: Rev Educ fis2016; 22: 283–289.
41.
VazLKraakWBatistaM, et al.Using anthropometric data and physical fitness scores to predict selection in a national U19 rugby union team. Int J Environ Res Public Health2021; 18: 1499.
42.
AsifMZutshiKMunjalJ, et al.Relationship among height, explosive power and shoulder strength on smashing accuracy in male badminton players. Eur J Phys Educ Sport Sci2018; 4: 92–106.
43.
FernandoWRISilvaRMPereraWNNK. A study of forehand overhead smash in badminton: relationship with upper body anthropometrics. Int Res Conf KDU 2020.
44.
ManikandanS. Relative importance of anthropometric biomotor and skill performance to playing ability of college badminton players. Int J Phys Educ Sports Health2016; 3: 156–158.
