Investigating the Perceived Effectiveness of Digital Technology for
Elite Athlete Support in Golf
Aimée Mears, Ieuan Phillips and Josh Sumner
Sports Technology Institute, Wolfson School of Mechanical, Electrical and Manufacturing Engineering,
Loughborough University, Loughborough, U.K.
Keywords: Biomechanics, Effectiveness, Technology.
Abstract: Digital technologies have enabled vast and varied amounts of data to be captured on elite athletes. The data
is intended for use by athletes, coaches and support team e.g. physiotherapists, sports scientists for many
purposes including performance development or injury prevention. However, the usefulness of such digital
technologies and the information gathered is only beneficial if deemed effective by all those involved. The
purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of digital technology for elite athletes’ development
and support from athlete, coach and support team perspective in golf. Interviews were conducted with athletes,
coaches and support team for a sport where digital technologies were used to facilitate training. The results
of the study uncovered four categories that helped to understand how effectiveness was perceived which were
“The Influence on Psychological Well-being and Proprioception”, “Measurement Uncertainty”,
“Environment” and “Type, Ease and Frequency of Use”. Exploring these categories provided insight into the
best practices for digital technology integration into elite athlete support and ultimately can help shape future
developments of digital technologies.
1 INTRODUCTION
For an athlete to reach the pinnacle of their sport, such
as competing at the Olympic Games, there is often an
organizational and management system put in place
to support the athlete (Cruickshank et al., 2014). Part
of this system includes the provision for a
multidisciplinary support team made up of coaches,
sport scientists and medical personnel responsible for
supporting an athlete’s performance or prevent injury.
An important role for the athlete support team is
the analysis of elite athletes’ technique to help
improve and produce stable performances,
particularly in individual sports such as golf
(Buttifield et al., 2009). Support teams are required
to observe and provide feedback of the performer’s
movement patterns or physical conditioning and
subsequently amend coaching interventions to bring
about a change in performance (Sherman et al., 2001).
It is also acknowledged that precise qualitative or
quantitative feedback may be more beneficial for elite
athletes who require accurate information to detect
errors in an already proficient performance (Smith
and Loschner, 2002). Biomechanics analysis is well
suited to provide this detailed feedback and
understanding about technique and is reliant on
digital technology. Advances in digital technology
(defined as any type of electronic device or
application that relies on recording, measuring and
processing information in a binary form (i.e. as digits
0 and 1)) have made it possible to provide this
augmented feedback to athletes (Liebermann et al.,
2002), yet the perceived effectiveness of technology
is often not addressed.
Digital technologies have been integrated into
many aspects of daily life which has resulted in a
growth in social sciences research. An impetus for
the research is a desire to understand the
consequences the technology has on social,
emotional, mental, intellectual or physical
development. Effective implementation of digital
technologies offers the chance to augment knowledge
in a given situation and provide evidence to make
informed decisions, which in sport could be a
decision about an elite athlete’s technique. The
technology itself does not automatically improve or
augment human understanding and for it to be useful
it must firstly be integrated into meaningful situations
(Price et al., 2013). Secondly, the technology must be
viewed as effective by all users and often is the
measure of a new technological innovation success
190
Mears, A., Phillips, I. and Sumner, J.
Investigating the Perceived Effectiveness of Digital Technology for Elite Athlete Support in Golf.
DOI: 10.5220/0008347501900197
In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support (icSPORTS 2019), pages 190-197
ISBN: 978-989-758-383-4
Copyright
c
2019 by SCITEPRESS Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
(Ratten, 2019). For example, the effectiveness of
current or future sport technology innovations, must
be judged worthwhile by all involved from the athlete
to the support team.
Golf is an individual sport which was
reintroduced as an Olympic sport in Rio 2016. In
golf, athletes are required to perform a variety of
shots to successfully displace the golf ball accurately
and a given distance in as few shots as possible. Golf
performance is objectively measured by the number
of shots required to complete a round and is not reliant
on digital technology for officiating purposes. Digital
technology is now readily used in elite golf to provide
feedback on golfer (Evans et al., 2012) or club (Leach
et al., 2017) movement, yet there is limited
understanding of how effective these technologies are
for their intended purpose.
The overall purpose of this study was to
investigate the effectiveness of digital technologies
for elite athlete support from the athlete, coach and
support team perspective. Three research questions
were proposed:
1. What and how had digital technologies been
implemented as part of elite athletes’ support?
2. What were the perceived benefits and limitations
of digital technologies as part of elite athlete support
from the athlete, coach and support team perspective?
3. How was the effectiveness of digital technologies
in elite athlete support perceived and measured by
athletes, coaches and support team?
The results of the study could provide
recommendations for the implementation and
development of future technologies for supporting
elite athletes.
2 METHODS
This study is based on the phenomenological belief
that the effectiveness of digital technology for elite
athlete support is perceived differently by athletes,
coaches and support team member and is best
understood from capturing individual first-hand
accounts. Given this belief, an interview was deemed
the most suitable qualitative research method. An
interview allowed themes and detailed descriptions
about the effectiveness of digital technology to be
explored based on the experience of coaches, athletes
and support team member using their own
terminology. The study was approved by
Loughborough University ethics advisory committee
and prior to the interview participants were asked to
sign a consent form.
2.1 Participants
Qualitative data collection methods typically rely on
relatively small samples of participants who are
selected based on the purpose of the research (Patton,
2002). Patton (2002) described these purposefully
sampled participants as ‘information-rich cases’ from
which, the researcher can gather in-depth information
related specifically to the purpose of the research. A
critical case purposeful sampling strategy was
employed to ensure that participants met the
following criteria: elite athletes competing
internationally in their chosen sport and actively
engaged with digital technology for biomechanics
analysis. Three male golfers (Golfer One, Two and
Three), aged 34.3 ± 13.5 years, two experienced golf
coaches (Golf Coach One and Two) and one
physiotherapist/strength and conditioning coach took
part in the study.
2.2 Data Collection
Interviews were conducted at the start of the
competitive golf season by the lead author who has a
background in biomechanics research. The
interviews were scheduled, where possible, to
coincide with a biomechanics analysis measurement
session which utilized digital technology to quantify
athletes and equipment biomechanics. An overview
of each measurement session including the
technology used are presented to show examples of
how technology is used and help to set the context
when interpreting the outcomes of the interviews.
2.2.1 Digital Technology
The example biomechanics measurement session
involved the use of three-dimensional (3D) motion
analysis, force plates and launch monitor. The launch
monitor provides objective measures of club and ball
variables such as clubhead velocity and ball velocity
which are considered key determinants of shot
displacement. The combined use of 3D motion
analysis and forces plates allow golfer kinematics and
kinetics to be computed and reported. Retro-
reflective markers were attached to the golfer to
create a model of the golfer from which biomechanics
variables were computed and shared through a report
containing graphs and tables of data.
2.2.2 Interviews
The interview was divided into three sections: (i)
digital technology and biomechanics analysis (ii)
benefits and limitations of digital technology and (iii)
Investigating the Perceived Effectiveness of Digital Technology for Elite Athlete Support in Golf
191
effectiveness of digital technology. Each section
began with an open-ended question followed by
several detail -oriented or clarification questions
which were re-worded based on the interviewee’s
responses. The interviews with athletes and support
team member were conducted at the same location as
the biomechanics measurement session. The
interviews with coaches were carried out at their
coaching venue. The interviews lasted between 30 -
45 minutes and were recorded an Olympus DS-5000
dictaphone from which typed transcripts were
produced for data analysis. Field notes were also
taken during the interview.
2.3 Data Analysis
Interviews were transcribed verbatim using the
qualitative analysis software QSR NVivo 12 (QSR
International). Subsequent analysis was also carried
out using NVivo.
An interpretative phenomenological analysis
(IPA) was carried out on the interview transcripts.
The goal of the IPA was to understand the concerns
of participants and to consider their claims based on
real-life experiences (Sparkes and Smith, 2014).
The IPA guidelines offered by Sparkes and Smith
(2014) were followed. A single analyst coded the
transcripts. Initially, transcripts were read several
times to become familiar with the accounts. Basic
annotations were made on the transcripts to highlight
and summarize areas of interest (i.e. coding). The
purpose of the initial coding was to capture
descriptive, linguistic or conceptual aspects of each
participants account. The initial coding was then
transformed into several themes which reflected the
participants perceptions. Connections between
themes were made and those which shared similar
concepts were clustered into categories. If company
names were used by participants when referring to
technology these were replaced with the type of
measurement technology.
3 RESULTS
3.1 Overview
Overall, mainly positive language was used by
athletes, coaches and support team members when
discussing technology with phrases such as,
extremely important”, and it’s bigused to answer
the question as to how important technology was to
the support provided to elite athletes. This view is not
surprising given successful elite athlete support
systems emphasise the provision of sport
science/coaching services and facilities that include
technology.
Athletes, coaches and the support team member
agreed that each member of the team would judge the
effectiveness of technology in the same way.
However, given each participant had different
experiences and understanding of the technology,
alternative perceptions were provided. As Golfer
Two notes:
if we didn't all agree then we wouldn't use it, but
we definitely know that it's massive for helping us
improve. [My coach]… knows more about the
[launch monitor] or [my support team member]
might know more about the biomechanics but when it
all comes together we have all the information that
we need, everything from physical to on-the-course
stuff, so it's massive and it does definitely help.
3.2 Perceived Effectiveness of Digital
Technology
In-depth analysis of the participants responses
uncovered four categories that helped to understand
how the effectiveness of digital technology for elite
athlete support was perceived. The categories were:
The Influence on Psychological Well-being and
Proprioception, Measurement Uncertainty,
Environment, Type, Ease and Frequency of Use
(Figure 1).
3.2.1 The Influence on Psychological
Well-being and Proprioception
All participants recognized that the use of technology
had the potential to influence feelings or emotions.
The positive feelings which technology provided
included increasing feelings of confidence or
preparedness which led to wanting to continue to use
the technology in future instances particularly for
Golfer Two:
If you've used either the [launch monitor] or the
biomechanics and seen that there has been an
improvement from either last week or six months ago
or twelve months ago, then, obviously that's going to
give you a boost that you know what you're doing is
leading in the right direction. So you're going to want
to continue to work on those and use the same
information or the same technology for the further
years as well.
Negative feelings could also be experienced,
which included the use of terms such as dependent
or a sense the technology hindered confidence. The
feeling that technology sometimes hindered
confidence was experienced by Golf Coach One and
icSPORTS 2019 - 7th International Conference on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support
192
they believed that it could undermine their thoughts
or view of a situation when working with a golfer.
This feeling was exasperated when the coach had a
strong sense of uncertainty about the technology
which will be presented in further detail in the next
section. As Golf Coach One explains:
If I just had my camera and just responded to what
the golf ball is doing, I think I might come across as
more confident, rather than trying to interprate
something that might even be wrong.
In instances where the data had been used to
change specific kinematic variables, Golf Coach One
expressed concern about the external focus of golf
being forgotten (i.e. hit the ball towards a pre-defined
target). It appeared that although the data could
identify a flaw in technique and used simple coding
systems to try and directly change this for a player, it
was deemed detrimental and the feedback provided
by the technology should instead be communicated
through the coach with support from those who were
knowledgeable about the technology:
Personally, Ive used [biomechanics analysis] in
my own golf and whether I interpreted the
information poorly or wasn't guided well enough
after but I really struggled with it because I was
trying to change a red light to a greenI kind of lost
the ball, stick, target side of it. I spoke with a new
pupil I've taken on the european tour and he'd spent
6 months working with someone who specialises in
biomechancis and he said he just lost the target
completely. So he now is thinking really internal and
I think most golfers learnt the game externally.
3.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty
Thoughts and concerns about the accuracy of the
technology also influenced their perceived
effectiveness of technology. Uncertainty about
measurement accuracy was a concern for all
participants. Golfer One expressed doubts over some
features of launch monitor technology which
ultimately influenced their use of the technology:
Figure 1: Four categories relating to the effectiveness of digital technology for elite athlete support from athlete, coach and
support team member perspective in golf.
Investigating the Perceived Effectiveness of Digital Technology for Elite Athlete Support in Golf
193
The more I learn about howinaccurate it is, just to
an nth degree that I don't look at some of the numbers
on a [launch monitor], but what I do know is that the
ball data, and especially with distances is such a key
part of golf that I use it every single week when I go
away so at the start of the week I would use it for
gauging, we could be at altitude, different
temperatures, how it affects the ball.
Golf Coach Two described how they would
compare the results of two types of technology to
check the quality of data and it appears that the cost
of the equipment had influenced their decision as
which was the most accurate. The need for coaches
to carry out such testing does raise question as to
whether there needs to be a legislative body or
requirement for companies to be more transparent
about measurement uncertainty. Golf Coach Two
explained:
the fact it is expensive for a reason, because it's
the highest quality, it's got the most research behind
it, it's got the best people behind it, it's the best made
etc. So therefore it costs quite a lot. I've done some
testing of different technologies against each other.
So I did [launch monitor 1] against [launch monitor
2] for example and [launch monitor 1] came out
pretty good to be honest but the fact I'm measuring it
against [launch monitor 2] is the benchmark kind
of says a lot really…some of the key data was very
similar, almost identical but the angle of attack data
was very different. But I will trust [launch monitor 2]
rather than [launch monitor 1] and more people use
it.
The support team member also commented on the
cost-effectiveness trade-of which it came to judge the
measurement uncertainty:
I have to question the technology because I know
how much things are to be really good, to produce
really good data. For example the electromagnetics
stuff, I'd be thinking 'how good is it,' but then it's so
practical. [Launch monitor] you stand it up, you
switch it on, you set it up, 'that's amazing' and 'yeah
that data must be great' but then in the big picture, it's
thousands of pounds worth, it's £16,000I'd be
thinking 'yeah, but force plates are way more than
that,' and so it's the perception, that value
3.2.3 Environment
Technology was seen to be disconnected from the
competitive environment, which for Golfer Three was
a concern for new golfers on the professional tours:
I think the only thing that's a downside really,
especially with this generation of young kids is that I
mean because when you do use technology, it's off the
perfect lie, a set lie, whereas you've got to go out
theregolf it's a forever changing environment, so,
with downhill lies and stuff like that. So the young
generation are too dependant on it I think, on this
stuff. They need to back away and just play golf.
Obviously combine the both, you know combine your
own talent with science but I think it's all about
getting the ball in the hole in the least possible shots
is the most important thing.
This recognized limitation of technology by the
golfer did not fully compromise the perceived
effectiveness of technology for golf coaches. For one
coach, it was not an expectation for the technology to
be able to replicate on-course conditions. The
decision of when and how to use the technology
appeared to be driven by the coach and if the coach
had a good appreciation for the limitation of
technology then necessary changes to the
implementation of technology were made. Golf
Coach Two summarised how they handle this
limitation of technology in golf:
You can stand there and try and make yourself too
perfect and then you know, golf is a game, it's a
problem solving game played in an ever changing
environment. So you have to practise that skill. You
know, the technology helps me with the technical stuff
which will help me to control the ballOnce you've
got ball control, which is what technology is helping
us do, then you need to get out in that ever changing
environment and make it work. So that's where you
withdraw the technology or slowly ween them off it.
You might take [launch monitor] out for a session,
then you might have a session without it and then you
are going to go on the golf course with no [launch
monitor] and you're going to put the artistic side of
the game together. But it's all made easier because
you've used technology to control the ball and get the
right physics in the ball, the right efficiency in you
body, the right sequence in your golf swing and so by
the time we do get out there it makes life a lot easier.
Golf Coach One and the Support Team member
supported the notion that future technology should
have the ability to emulate on-course or competition
surroundings:
Where as the [launch monitor], biomechanics and
the force plate, that isn't going to give me data on how
[the golfer] or anyone performed on the first tee or
the 67th hole, with 5 to go in a major. That's the kind
of information we need to find out.
So technologogy has to be portable, and that's
why everyone's just using mobile phones, because it's
easier isn't it, everyone's got one. So portable, how
quick it's reported, how easy is it to understand, but
ultimately it needs to be accurate as well.
icSPORTS 2019 - 7th International Conference on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support
194
3.2.4 Type, Ease and Frequency of Use
The frequency of use was another suggested metric as
to how effective digital technology was as part of elite
athlete support. Golf Coach One stated:
I think probably the best way to interperate it is
how often do you use it? If myself or a player go to
use it, then I think it's probably effective.
The frequency with which technology was used
was also related to the ease of set-up. A technology
that was easy to set-up was beneficial for all groups
of participants particularly when travelling to
tournaments around the world. Video technology
was often still seen as the most useful type of
technology due to its ease of set-up. Golf Coach One
commented:
The one thing that we'll use all the time is video
and a slo-mo video off an iPad. I try to be very
consistent with the height that I film atWhile
biomechanics can tell me how much the lead wrist is
in flexion , I can see a huge amount of where it is with
pressure trace mats and things like that. I just think
that the most usable piece of technology is still video.
You'll probably get shot down by somebody who is a
biomechanist or somebody who likes pressure mats
but as a coach, you're travelling from place to place,
performer to performer, the one thing that's really
consistent is the camera and whether you want to
draw lines or just view it. View it in slo-mo, view it at
full speed, just to get the rhythm of the thing, I just
still think it's the best. I think I probably could do my
job just with that.
4 DISCUSSION
The aim of this study was to investigate the
effectiveness of digital technologies for elite athlete
support from athlete, coach and support team member
perspectives. Based on an interpretative
phenomenological analysis of interviews,
predominantly positive views were expressed with
regards to the use of technology for analysing athlete
performance. Four main categories relating to the
perceived effectiveness of technology were found:
“The Influence on Psychological Well-being and
Proprioception”, “Measurement Uncertainty”,
“Environment”, “Type, Ease and Frequency of Use”.
The interpretations of first-hand accounts can be used
to provide suggestions of how to judge the
effectiveness of existing or future technologies and
help with decisions relating to implementation or
investment in digital technology.
All participants described instances where the use
of digital technology had influenced their
psychological well-being in mainly positive but
sometimes negative ways. Technology was an
effective tool for encouraging positive feelings such
as improving confidence, increasing a sense of
preparedness and alleviating negative moods (Figure
1). Healthcare technologies have been promoted as
ways to help treat major health problems such as
obesity (Pagoto et al., 2013; Solbrig et al., 2017) or
managing cancer treatments (Bender et al., 2013).
Online and mobile applications (apps) have been
developed to help manage weight loss programmes
for example, but apps that failed to acknowledge
psychological well-being of users were not rated
favourably (Bender et al., 2013). Apps which
provided motivational support rather than simple
quantification of calories for example were seen to be
more effective by users (Solbrig et al., 2017). There
is a similarity with athletes’ perceptions whereby
technology was deemed effectives if it influenced
their confidence. Therefore, future technologies
could further encourage the motivational nature of
digital technology through presentation of data as
opposed to just presenting quantitative results.
Mental health is an important concern for the
International Olympic Committee (IOC) with the
latest consensus statement published (Reardon et al.
2019). The consensus recognized several factors that
may influence an elite athlete’s mental health by
considering the wider social environment of the elite
athlete and how an environment can be created that
supports mental well-being and resilience. In the
consensus, coaches were encouraged to de-emphasize
achievements and outcomes and instead develop a
growth, effort and improvement mindset in athletes
(Reardon et al., 2019). This study has shown that the
use of technology can influence feelings, which for
the athletes in this study, were predominantly
positive, but it does still suggest that technology can
be a potential source of stress. Therefore, it may be
beneficial for strategies for the implementation of
digital technology to be decided within a support
team to avoid causing unnecessary stress. For
example, a strategy may include gradual introduction
of technology for athletes starting within an elite
athlete support programme. Furthermore, if not
already provided, coach education courses could
incorporate information about the social sciences
view of the role and use of technology in elite sport
as suggested by Taylor et al., (2017).
Concerns were raised when the technology
provided individualized feedback about specific
kinematic variables without considering the wider
Investigating the Perceived Effectiveness of Digital Technology for Elite Athlete Support in Golf
195
context of the feedback. Recommendations for
measurement of elite athletes has emphasized the
need for individualized measurement as it may
provide better understanding and evidence-based
support for athlete performance (Sands et al., 2019).
Golfers, for example, show inter-individual
differences in their movement patterns even for
similar clubheadball impact parameters (Smith et
al., 2017). The recommendation for future studies is
that data analysis methods must provide
interpretation and understanding of this
individualized, multidimensional movement (Lamb
and Pataky, 2018). Analysis methods that can provide
this type of interpretation are of interest to include in
analysis systems aimed at providing quantitative
feedback to coaches about the athlete’s technique
which help inform personalized coaching
interventions for performance enhancement or injury
prevention.
Coaches and support team members who felt
undermined by technology remarked about the
accuracy of the technology. Measurement errors are
impossible to avoid and therefore it is wrong to
assume that a measurement technology gives the
exact value of a variable of interest (Morris and
Langari, 2012). Errors can be reduced through good
data collection methods, appropriate analysis and
processing yet there will always be some level of
uncertainty. The coach-athlete relationship is very
important and for elite coaches having a good rapport
with athletes was perceived as the most important
need for elite coaching practice (Williams and
Kendall, 2007). If the coach feels undermined by the
technology, it may start to affect the rapport with the
athlete. It is therefore important that coaches can
provide sound knowledge of the measurement
uncertainty of the technology being used (Sands et al.,
2019). Some of this responsibility may also fall with
technology manufacturers by educating users about
the technology’s limitations, the measurement
uncertainty particularly in applied settings and openly
sharing validation procedures. One example where
measurement uncertainty has caused confusion is
Hawk-eye technologies used for officiating tennis
tournaments (Collins and Evans, 2008). Collins and
Evans (2008) argued that Hawk-eye’s presentation of
line calls in tennis were overestimating the ability of
the technology because measurement uncertainty was
not clearly shown to television audiences or athletes
during the competition. Hence, more could be done
by technology manufacturers to encourage a sense of
trustworthiness in the data amongst users. Unless this
occurs, independent studies comparing and reviewing
commercially available technologies will continue to
be conducted and published to help users appreciate
their inherent strengths and limitations (Evans et al.
2012; Leach et al., 2017).
The cost of technology and popularity of a
technology amongst peers appeared to influence
judgments about effectiveness. Some of the
technologies available on the market have a high cost
and therefore it is anticipated there would need to be
a cost-effectiveness trade-off. A technology with a
higher cost was presumed to be more accurate and
have the most research and development which it is
unclear whether this can be proven unless companies
or systems are willing to share details and the research
and development. This can cause some ethical
questions relating to availability of funds to purchase
such technology, for example for elite athletes in
developing countries. Once more, companies could
do more to justify the costs of the technology. Coach
education courses could also provide unbiased
reviews and insights into different technologies to
help coaches or support teams make better informed
decisions about the most appropriate technology.
5 CONCLUSIONS
In summary, mainly positive language was used by
athletes, coaches and support team when discussing
the effectiveness of digital technologies. Athletes,
coaches and support team members were in strong
agreement about the effectiveness of technology.
Digital technology did have the potential to influence
psychological well-being and proprioception but with
effective coaching strategies to implement
technologies these feelings could be managed.
Measurement uncertainty is an aspect of technology
that influences the feelings of each member of the
support team. Technology innovators and companies
providing more transparent information about the
measurement technology could help improve feelings
of trustworthiness amongst users who often pay large
amounts for the technology.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank the Advanced Olympic Studies
Programme for providing funding for the study.
icSPORTS 2019 - 7th International Conference on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support
196
REFERENCES
Bender, J.L., Yue, R.Y.K., To, M.J., Deacken, L. and Jadad,
A.R. 2013. A lot of action, but not in the right direction:
Systematic review and content analysis of smartphone
applications for the prevention, detection, and
management of cancer. Journal of Medical Internet
Research 15(12).
Buttifield, A., Ball, K. and MacMahon, C. 2009. The use of
motor learning in Biomechanics: A call for more
collaboration. International Journal of Sport
Psychology 40, pp. 603615.
Collins, H. and Evans, R. 2008. You cannot be serious!
Public understanding of technology with special
reference to ‘hawk-Eye’. Public Understanding of
Science 17(3), pp. 283308.
Cruickshank, A., Collins, D. and Minten, S. 2014. Driving
and Sustaining Culture Change in Olympic Sport
Performance Teams: A First Exploration and Grounded
Theory. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology
36(1), pp. 107120.
Evans, K., Horan, S. a., Neal, R.J., Barrett, R.S. and Mills,
P.M. 2012. Repeatability of three-dimensional thorax
and pelvis kinematics in the golf swing measured using
a field-based motion capture system. Sports
Biomechanics, pp. 111.
Lamb, P.F. and Pataky, T.C. 2018. The role of pelvis-thorax
coupling in controlling within-golf club swing speed.
Journal of Sports Sciences 36(19), pp. 21642171.
Leach, R.J., Forrester, S.E., Mears, A.C. and Roberts, J.R.
2017. How valid and accurate are measurements of golf
impact parameters obtained using commercially
available radar and stereoscopic optical launch
monitors? Measurement: Journal of the International
Measurement Confederation 112(January), pp. 125
136.
Liebermann, D.G., Katz, L., Hughes, M.D., Bartlett, R.M.,
McClements, J. and Franks, I.M. 2002. Advances in the
application of information technology to sport
performance. Journal of Sports Sciences 20(10), pp.
755769.
Morris, A.S. and Langari, R. 2012. Measurement and
instrumentation : theory and application. Academic
Press.
Pagoto, S., Schneider, K., Jojic, M., Debiasse, M. and
Mann, D. 2013. Evidence-based strategies in weight-
loss mobile apps. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine 45(5), pp. 576582.
Patton, M. 2002. Qualitative Research and evaluation
methods. 3
rd
ed. London: Sage.
Price, S., Jewitt, C. and Brown, B. 2013. The SAGE
handbook of digital technology research.
Ratten, V. 2019. Introduction: Sport Technology and
Innovation. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Reardon, C.L., Hainline, B., Aron, C.M., Baron, D., Baum,
A.L., Bindra, A., Budgett, R., Campriani, N.,
Castaldelli-Maia, J.M., Currie, A., Derevensky, J.L.,
Glick, I.D., Gorczynski, P., Gouttebarge, V., Grandner,
M.A., Han, D.H., McDuff, D., Mountjoy, M., Polat, A.,
Purcell, R., Putukian, M., Rice, S., Sills, A., Stull, T.,
Swartz, L., Zhu, L.J. and Engebretsen, L. 2019. Mental
health in elite athletes: International Olympic
Committee consensus statement 2019. British Journal
of Sports Medicine 53(11), pp. 667699.
Sands, W., Cardinale, M., McNeal, J., Murray, S., Sole, C.,
Reed, J., Apostolopoulos, N. and Stone, M. 2019.
Recommendations for Measurement and Management
of an Elite Athlete. Sports 7(5), p. 105.
Sherman, C.A., Sparrow, W.A., Jolley, D. and Eldering, J.
2001. Coaches’ perceptions of golf swing kinematics.
International Journal of Sport Psychology 31, pp. 257
270.
Smith, A.C., Roberts, J.R., Kong, P.W. and Forrester, S.E.
2017. Comparison of centre of gravity and centre of
pressure patterns in the golf swing. European Journal
of Sport Science 17(2), pp. 168178.
Smith, R.M. and Loschner, C. 2002. Biomechanics
feedback for rowing. Journal of Sports Sciences 20(10),
pp. 78391.
Solbrig, L., Jones, R., Kavanagh, D., May, J., Parkin, T. and
Andrade, J. 2017. People trying to lose weight dislike
calorie counting apps and want motivational support to
help them achieve their goals. Internet Interventions 7,
pp. 2331.
Sparkes, A.C. and Smith, B. 2014. Qualitative research
methods in sport, exercise and health : from process to
product.
Taylor, W.G., Potrac, P., Nelson, L.J., Jones, L. and Groom,
R. 2017. An elite hockey player’s experiences of video-
based coaching: A poststructuralist reading.
International Review for the Sociology of Sport 52(1),
pp. 112125.
Williams, S.J. and Kendall, L. 2007. Perceptions of elite
coaches and sports scientists of the research needs for
elite coaching practice. Journal of Sports Sciences
25(14), pp. 15771586.
Investigating the Perceived Effectiveness of Digital Technology for Elite Athlete Support in Golf
197