Case Studies in Exercise and Sport Sciences: A Powerful Tool to Bridge the Science–Practice Gap

in International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD $24.95

Student 1 year subscription

USD $107.00

1 year subscription

USD $142.00

Student 2 year subscription

USD $203.00

2 year subscription

USD $265.00

Despite the progress made by the scientific exercise community in collaborating and communicating with nonscientist coaches, there is room for improvement. Coaches find research difficult to understand, feel that their interests are not being addressed by exercise research, and rely on peer discussion to further their coaching knowledge base while consuming few peer-reviewed articles. One useful strategy to bridge the science–practice gap is with case studies. In addition to furthering our understanding of the physiology, psychology, and training schedules of elite athletes, case studies can serve (1) as a useful communication channel with coaches if presented as narratives and (2) to establish and strengthen relationships between scientists and coaches, leading to fruitful research collaborations. The purpose of this invited commentary is to discuss these 2 less-recognized benefits of case studies and propose a way to incorporate case studies more frequently alongside group-based studies.

The author is with the School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John’s, NL, Canada.

Address correspondence to Israel.halperin@mun.ca.
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
References
  • 1.

    Coutts AJ. Working fast and working slow: the benefits of embedding research in high-performance sport. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2016;11(1):12. PubMed ID: 26752203 doi:10.1123/IJSPP.2015-0781

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Stoszkowski JCollins D. Sources, topics and use of knowledge by coaches. J Sports Sci. 2016;34(9):794802. PubMed ID: 26222481 doi:10.1080/02640414.2015.1072279

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Buchheit M. Houston, we still have a problem. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017;12(8):11111114. PubMed ID: 28714760 doi:10.1123/ijspp.2017-0422

  • 4.

    Reade IRodgers WSpriggs K. New ideas for high performance coaches: a case study of knowledge transfer in sport science. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2008;3(3):335354. doi:10.1260/174795408786238533

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Harper LDMcCunn R. “Hand in Glove”: using qualitative methods to connect research and practice. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017;12(7):990993. PubMed ID: 28714750 doi:10.1123/ijspp.2017-0081

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Hinyard LJKreuter MW. Using narrative communication as a tool for health behavior change: a conceptual, theoretical, and empirical overview. Health Educ Behav. 2007;34(5):777792. PubMed ID: 17200094 doi:10.1177/1090198106291963

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Dahlstrom MF. Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2014;111(suppl 4):1361413620. doi:10.1073/pnas.1320645111

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Martinez-Conde SMacknik SL. Opinion: finding the plot in science storytelling in hopes of enhancing science communication. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2017;114(31):81278129. PubMed ID: 28765506 doi:10.1073/pnas.1711790114

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Lipkus IMSamsa GRimer BK. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Making. 2001;21(1):3744. PubMed ID: 11206945 doi:10.1177/0272989X0102100105

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Galesic MGarcia-Retamero R. Statistical numeracy for health: a cross-cultural comparison with probabilistic national samples. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(5):462468. PubMed ID: 20212183 doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2009.481

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Haller HKrauss S. Misinterpretations of significance: a problem students share with their teachers. Methods Psychol Res. 2002;7(1):120.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Cunningham RMBoom JA. Telling stories of vaccine-preventable diseases: why it works. S D Med. 2013;(Spec):2126.

  • 13.

    De Wit JBDas EVet R. What works best: objective statistics or a personal testimonial? An assessment of the persuasive effects of different types of message evidence on risk perception. Health Psychol. 2008;27(1):110115. PubMed ID: 18230021 doi:10.1037/0278-6133.27.1.110

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Halperin IChapman DWMartin DTLewthwaite RWulf G. Choices enhance punching performance of competitive kickboxers. Psychol Res. 2016;81(5):10511058. PubMed ID: 27465395 doi:10.1007/s00426-016-0790-1

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Blanchfield AHardy JMarcora S. Non-conscious visual cues related to affect and action alter perception of effort and endurance performance. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014;8:967. PubMed ID: 25566014 doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00967

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
Article Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 114 114 28
Full Text Views 11 11 6
PDF Downloads 6 6 5
Altmetric Badge
PubMed
Google Scholar
Cited By