Literature DB >> 30128660

Is the head-fake effect in basketball robust against practice? Analyses of trial-by-trial adaptations, frequency distributions, and mixture effects to evaluate effects of practice.

Iris Güldenpenning1, Christoph Schütz2, Matthias Weigelt3, Wilfried Kunde4.   

Abstract

Reactions to the pass of a basketball player performing a head fake are typically slower than reactions to a basketball player who passes without a head fake (i.e., head-fake effect). The present study shows that extensive practice reduces the head-fake effect in basketball. Additional analyses were conducted to explore the mechanism behind the reduced head-fake effect. First, we analyzed whether or not participants developed some control over the processing of irrelevant gaze direction, as indicated by specific trial-to-trial adaptations (i.e., congruency sequence effect). Second, we fitted the individual frequency distributions of RTs to ex-Gaussian distributions, to evaluate if practice specifically affects the Gaussian part of the distribution or the exponential part of the distribution. Third, we modeled individual RT distributions as the so-called mixture effects to examine whether the way irrelevant gaze direction impacts performance (either occasionally but massively or continuously but moderately) changes with practice. The analyses revealed that the effect of practice could not be explained with an increasing congruency-sequence effect. Also, it could not be found in the ex-Gaussian distributional analyses. The assumption that residual failure to inhibit the processing of the gaze direction in contrast to continuous failures to do so might favor mixed effects over uniform effects at later courses of practice could not be validated. The reduced head-fake effect thus is argued to source in participants' general increasing ability to inhibit the processing of the task-irrelevant gaze direction information and/or in a priority shift of gaze processing to a processing of the pass direction.

Entities:  

Year:  2018        PMID: 30128660     DOI: 10.1007/s00426-018-1078-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Res        ISSN: 0340-0727


  19 in total

1.  Do the eyes have it? Cues to the direction of social attention.

Authors: 
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 20.229

2.  Optimizing the use of information: strategic control of activation of responses.

Authors:  G Gratton; M G Coles; E Donchin
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1992-12

Review 3.  Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review.

Authors:  C M MacLeod
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 17.737

4.  Stroop performance in healthy younger and older adults and in individuals with dementia of the Alzheimer's type.

Authors:  D H Spieler; D A Balota; M E Faust
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  A likelihood ratio test for mixture effects.

Authors:  Jeff Miller
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2006-02

6.  Stroop interference, practice, and aging.

Authors:  Douglas J Davidson; Rose T Zacks; Carrick C Williams
Journal:  Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn       Date:  2003-06

7.  Training on integrated versus separated Stroop tasks: the progression of interference and facilitation.

Authors:  C M MacLeod
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1998-03

Review 8.  Practice-related optimization and transfer of executive functions: a general review and a specific realization of their mechanisms in dual tasks.

Authors:  Tilo Strobach; Tiina Salminen; Julia Karbach; Torsten Schubert
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2014-03-26

9.  Control over the processing of the opponent's gaze direction in basketball experts.

Authors:  Matthias Weigelt; Iris Güldenpenning; Yvonne Steggemann-Weinrich; Mustafa Alhaj Ahmad Alaboud; Wilfried Kunde
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2017-06

10.  Confidence intervals for two sample means: Calculation, interpretation, and a few simple rules.

Authors:  Roland Pfister; Markus Janczyk
Journal:  Adv Cogn Psychol       Date:  2013-06-17
View more
  2 in total

1.  A question of (perfect) timing: A preceding head turn increases the head-fake effect in basketball.

Authors:  Andrea Polzien; Iris Güldenpenning; Matthias Weigelt
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Accounting for Proportion Congruency Effects in the Stroop Task in a Confounded Setup: Retrieval of Stimulus-Response Episodes Explains it All.

Authors:  Klaus Rothermund; Nathalie Gollnick; Carina G Giesen
Journal:  J Cogn       Date:  2022-06-29
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.