Since the release of advanced footwear technology (AFT) in 2017, the running landscape has changed forever. However, researchers are unable to decisively conclude what part of AFT contributes the most to running economy (RE) improvements, with some eluding to a potential placebo effect of AFT shoes. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the presence of a potential placebo effect of AFT on RE and perceptual measures in female recreational runners. Chapter One provides a brief overview of the origins of AFT, the properties of AFT proposed to contribute to RE improvements, shoe comfort, and placebo effects in sports and footwear research. Features of AFT shoes typically are a curved geometry, a rigid plate embedded in the midsole, and a resilient and compliant energy-returning foam midsole. AFT shoes are also typically lightweight, linked with improved RE. Research generally reports an average improvement in RE of runners when wearing AFT; however, responses are variable and there are responders and non-responders to AFT. In Chapter Two, 26 female recreational runners (age: 34.7 ± 10.1 y, VO2peak: 45.19 ± 4.65 mL/kg/min) completed one session at the University of Waikato Adams Centre for High Performance Laboratory to assess RE and perceptual measures in two pairs of women’s Nike Vaporfly NEXT% 2. Participants completed 4 x 6-minute RE trials in these two pairs of shoes. One pair was described as a performance-enhancing super shoe (SS) with AFT worn by elite athletes, and the other pair was spray-painted black and described as a “knock-off” (KO) of the performance-enhancing shoe without AFT. Data from 24 participants were analysed (age: 33.3 ± 8.9 y, VO2peak: 45.58 ± 4.17 mL/kg/min) as physiological data from two participants suggested running above their aerobic threshold. Oxygen consumption was not significantly different between SS and KO (mean difference: 0.24 ± 0.64 mL/kg/min, p = 0.077, d = 0.11 [-0.01, 0.23]). Overall comfort on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) was significantly greater in SS than KO (mean difference: 14.6 ± 15.0 mm, p < 0.001, d = 0.94 [0.46, 1.40]), with 87.5% of runners preferring the SS over the KO. Runners perceived running as more enjoyable and less difficult, and perceived an improved running performance and lower injury risk in SS when compared to KO based on visual analogue scale scores (p ≤ 0.009, d = 0.72 to 1.16). While no significant physiological difference was observed between shoes, a significant difference in perceived comfort and performance was observed favouring the performance-enhancing SS, suggesting a perceptual placebo effect based on shoe description alone. Chapter Three summarises the findings and provides avenues for future research. Overall, this thesis provides evidence that product descriptions can influence the perception of shoe comfort, performance, and injury risk. The improvements in RE reported for AFT shoes appear underpinned by how runners interact with the shoe properties, rather than by a placebo effect – at least in female recreational runners. Investigating a potential placebo effect in AFT during maximal running performances may provide further insight into the performance enhancements associated with shoes containing AFT.