Impact of Sport Context and Support on the Use of a Self-Report Measure for Athlete Monitoring.

Athlete self-report measures (ASRM) are a popular method of athlete monitoring in high-performance sports. With increasing recognition and accessibility, ASRM may potentially be utilized by athletes from diverse sport contexts. The purpose of the present study was to improve understanding of ASRM implementation across different sport contexts by observing uptake and compliance of a newly implemented ASRM over 16 weeks, and investigating the perceived roles and factors influencing implementation. Athletes (n=131) completed an electronic survey at baseline and week 16 on their perceptions and experiences with ASRM implementation respectively. Despite initial interest, only 70 athletes attempted to use the ASRM. Of these athletes, team sport athletes who were supported by their coach or sports program to use the ASRM were most compliant (p < 0.001) with a mean compliance of 84 ± 21 %. Compliance for self-directed individual and team sport athletes was 28 ± 40 % and 8 ± 18 % respectively. Self-directed athletes were motivated to monitor themselves, and rated desired content and minimal burden as key factors for initial and ongoing compliance. Supported athletes were primarily motivated to comply for the benefit of their coach or sports program rather than themselves, however rated data output as a key factor for their continued use. Factors of the measure outweighed those of the social environment regardless of sport context, however the influence of social environmental factors should not be discounted. The findings of the present study demonstrate the impact of sport context on the implementation of an ASRM and the need to tailor implementation strategies accordingly. Key pointsAthletes perceive ASRM and the factors influencing implementation differently. Therefore, to encourage compliance, it is important to tailor implementation strategies to the athlete and their sport context to increase appeal and minimize unappealing factors.Athletes using an ASRM on their own accord typically favor a measure which meets their needs and interests, with minimal burden.Athletes using an ASRM under the direction and support of their coach or sports program typically favor feedback and a positive social environment.

[1]  Neal E. Miller,et al.  Personality and Psychotherapy: An Analysis in Terms of Learning, Thinking, and Culture , 1963 .

[2]  Neal E. Miller,et al.  Personality and Psychotherapy , 1951 .

[3]  A. Bandura Social cognitive theory of self-regulation☆ , 1991 .

[4]  B. Berglund,et al.  Psychological monitoring and modulation of training load of world-class canoeists. , 1994, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[5]  M. Blais,et al.  Toward a New Measure of Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation, and Amotivation in Sports: The Sport Motivation Scale (SMS) , 1995 .

[6]  M. Andersen,et al.  Athletic injury, psychosocial factors and perceptual changes during stress. , 1999, Journal of sports sciences.

[7]  J. Durlak,et al.  Implementation Matters: A Review of Research on the Influence of Implementation on Program Outcomes and the Factors Affecting Implementation , 2008, American journal of community psychology.

[8]  M. Kellmann Preventing overtraining in athletes in high‐intensity sports and stress/recovery monitoring , 2010, Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports.

[9]  Mykolas Kavaliauskas Relationships between Muscular Performance and Markers of Well-Being in Elite Rugby Union Players , 2010 .

[10]  Romain Meeusen,et al.  Prevention, diagnosis and treatment of the overtraining syndrome: Joint consensus statement of the European College of Sport Science (ECSS) and the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) , 2013 .

[11]  A. Fry,et al.  Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment of the Overtraining Syndrome: Joint Consensus Statement of the European College of Sport Science and the American College of Sports Medicine , 2012 .

[12]  D. Meyer,et al.  Perceptions of Wellness to Monitor Adaptive Responses to Training and Competition in Elite Australian Football , 2013, Journal of strength and conditioning research.

[13]  Craig Twist,et al.  Monitoring fatigue and recovery in rugby league players. , 2013, International journal of sports physiology and performance.

[14]  Alex Donaldson,et al.  Implementing injury surveillance systems alongside injury prevention programs: evaluation of an online surveillance system in a community setting , 2014, Injury Epidemiology.

[15]  Shona L. Halson,et al.  Monitoring Training Load to Understand Fatigue in Athletes , 2014, Sports Medicine.

[16]  Deborah Lupton,et al.  Self-Tracking Modes: Reflexive Self-Monitoring and Data Practices , 2014 .

[17]  P. Gastin,et al.  Role of a Self-report Measure in Athlete Preparation , 2015, Journal of strength and conditioning research.

[18]  Paul B Gastin,et al.  Monitoring athletes through self-report: factors influencing implementation. , 2015, Journal of sports science & medicine.

[19]  E. Verhagen,et al.  Protecting the health of the @hlete: how online technology may aid our common goal to prevent injury and illness in sport , 2015, British Journal of Sports Medicine.