‘
real-world
’
study are also a potential source of knowledge about their sport, as may be
other coaches and performers involved; not all of their knowledge will normally be
evidence-based, so care is needed in using it. Problems associated with synthesising all
of this knowledge include con
fl
icts of opinion, a reliance on the
‘
elite-athlete template
’
(i.e. what the most successful do must also be right for others) and incorrect notions
about critical features.
Scienti
fi
c research should provide the most valid and accurate sources of informa-
tion. Movement analysts need some research training, however, to interpret research
fi
ndings: applied BSc or MSc degrees should provide such training, while a research-
focused PhD may not. The best sources of relevant, applied research are applied sports
science research journals, such as
Sports Biomechanics
, published on behalf of the ISBS,
and the best coaching journals, such as
New Studies in Athletics
. Sports-speci
fi
c scienti
fi
c
review papers draw together knowledge from many sources and provide a valuable
source of information for movement analysts, providing the reviews have an applied
rather than a fundamental research focus. The
Journal of Sports Sciences
has been a
fruitful source for such review papers. The major problem with scienti
fi
c research as a
source of information for the qualitative movement analyst might be called the validity
con
fl
ict between internal (research) validity and ecological (real-world) validity.
It is not su
ffi
cient just to gather knowledge of the activity; it must also be theoretic-
ally focused and practically synthesised. Adopting a
‘
fundamental movement pattern
’
approach is now seen as
fl
awed, because of its over-reliance on the motor program
concept of cognitive motor control. The constraints-led approach, introduced brie
fl
y in
Chapter 1, considers the movement
‘
space
’
(the set of all possible solutions to the
speci
fi
c movement task) as constrained by the task, environment and organism; this is
the approach of ecological motor control, which is still evolving. The critical features
approach, adopted below, is the most widely used by movement analysts from a sports
biomechanics perspective. The analyst needs to keep practising this practical approach,
whose points are widely used in teaching and coaching. The movement criterion might
be injury risk, movement e
ff
ectiveness
–
de
fi
ned as achievement of the movement goal
–
or e
ffi
ciency, the economical use of metabolic energy. Analysts often specify a range of
correctness of critical features, and this range must be observable. One common error is
not focusing su
ffi
ciently on devising cue words for use in correcting technique errors;
error correction should be seen as the responsibility of the movement analysis team,
which includes the coach and the movement analyst, not the coach alone.