Spor Bilimciler için doğru terminoloji:PAP veya PAPE

Aim: The existence of multiple mechanisms underlying Post-Activation Potentiation (PAP), variations in measurement techniques, and the differing demands of physiological processes (e.g., increased potential following warm-up) have contributed to a terminological ambiguity in the literature. This ambiguity primarily stems from the uncertainty regarding how to accurately define the performance-enhancing effects of PAP interventions. In recent years, the term Post-Activation Performance Enhancement (PAPE) has increasingly been adopted in place of PAP. The aim of the present study is to conduct a detailed examination of the usage and application of the terms PAP and PAPE within the sports science literature, to analyze the distinctions in methodology and measurement between the two concepts, and to identify the most appropriate terminology based on intended use.Methods: This study employed a document analysis approach to investigate how PAP and PAPE are defined, utilized, and differentiated in the scientific literature. During the data collection process, the following keywords were used: “Post-Activation Potentiation,” “Post-Activation Performance Enhancement,” “PAP vs. PAPE,” “PAP,” and “PAPE.” Data were retrieved through systematic searches conducted in academic databases including Google Scholar, PubMed, and ScienceDirect.Findings: Traditionally, the term PAP has been used to describe the increase in muscle force/torque production observed during electrically evoked contractions. In contrast, PAPE refers to performance enhancements observed following high-intensity voluntary contractions or activities involving prior conditioning stimuli. In this context, both PAP and PAPE are temporally dependent phenomena, with peak performance improvements typically occurring approximately 5 to 10 minutes post-activation. Nevertheless, the findings of this study highlight that the fundamental terminological distinction between PAP and PAPE is primarily attributable to differences in measurement methodologies.Conclusion: While both PAP and PAPE are associated with enhanced performance following muscular activation, they are grounded in distinct physiological and methodological frameworks. PAP is characterized by short-term improvements in force output, typically assessed through laboratory-based, mechanically oriented measurements. Conversely, PAPE encompasses a broader scope, targeting improvements in athletic performance and generally requiring field-based performance assessments. Thus, appropriate terminology should be selected in accordance with the measurement context and the nature of the activation protocol.Keywords: PAP, PAPE, Post-Activation Potentiation, Post-Activation Potentiation Enhancement