Athlete self-report measures (ASRM) have the potential to provide valuable insight into the training response; however, there is a disconnect between research and practice that needs to be addressed; namely, the measure or methods used in research are not always reflective of practice, or data primarily obtained from practice lacks empirical quality. This commentary reviews existing empirical measures and the psychometric properties required to be considered acceptable for research and practice. This information will allow discerning readers to make a judgment on the quality of ASRM data being reported in research papers. Fastidious practitioners and researchers are also provided with explicit guidelines for selecting and implementing an ASRM and reporting these details in research papers.
If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.
Saw and Gastin are with the Centre for Sport Research, and Main, the Inst for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia. Kellmann is with the Faculty of Sport Science, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany, and the School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.