Table 1.
Characteristics of the 18 male recreational runners and shoes worn by participants during the study.
Table 2.
Questions asked immediately before and after running with novel shoes at two different speeds for a total of 1.5 km.
Table 3.
Names and descriptions of the five main themes emerging from the semi-structured interviews conducted with male recreational runners (n = 18) derived from the three phases of this project: initial inspection, running experience, and final shoe ranking.
Fig 1.
The overarching themes and how they interact in describing the novel shoe experience of participating runners.
Fig 2.
Stacked bar charts of the responses from runners (n = 15 FLAT, n = 14 AFT) to whether they would purchase the novel shoes before and after running in them presented as before/after response.
The number of participants who provided a given response is in parentheses. Abbreviations: AFT, advanced footwear technology (Nike Vaporfly 4%). FLAT, minimal road racing flat (Saucony Endorphin Racer 2).
Fig 3.
Representation of the three words used to describe the novel shoes after running by runners (n = 18).
The radar plot represents the frequency of word use. Synonyms were counted as the same word. Abbreviations: AFT, advanced footwear technology (Nike Vaporfly 4%). FLAT, minimal road racing flat (Saucony Endorphin Racer 2).
Fig 4.
Stacked bar charts of runners (n = 18) preferences for different criteria following running a total of 1.5 km at two different speeds.
Rankings represent most preferred (rank 1) to least preferred (rank 3) for comfort at the slow speed, comfort at the fast speed, and overall performance. Rankings represent perceived lowest injury risk (rank 1) to highest injury risk (rank 3). Abbreviations: AFT, advanced footwear technology (Nike Vaporfly 4%). FLAT, minimal road racing flat (Saucony Endorphin Racer 2). OWN, runners habitual footwear.