4.1 Article

Comparison of Visual Search Behavior and Decision-making Accuracy in Expert and Novice Fencing Referees

期刊

OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE
卷 98, 期 7, 页码 783-788

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001726

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study compared the visual search behavior and decision-making accuracy of expert and novice fencing referees, with results showing that expert referees had higher decision-making accuracy, fewer fixations, longer fixation durations, and different fixation locations compared to novice referees.
SIGNIFICANCE Perceptual-cognitive skills are the capacity of athletes to identify task-relevant information in the environment and integrate information with the knowledge available for decision making or controlling motor responses. Gaze behavior is one performance-related perceptual skill and a key factor affecting expertise affecting referee performance. PURPOSE The aim of this study was to compare visual search behavior and decision-making accuracy of expert and novice fencing referees. METHOD Twenty-eight referees were divided into expert (n = 14) and novice (n = 14) groups. Participants were fitted with mobile eye trackers and participated in tests that consisted of five blocks of 10 video clips. Videos are provided annually by the World Fencing Federation for referee testing. RESULTS The results showed a significant difference between the two groups in terms of the accuracy of decision making, number, duration, and location of fixations. Expert referees had higher decision-making accuracy compared with novice referees. Expert referees had fewer fixations than did novice referees. Fixations of expert referees were longer than those of novice referees, and the locations of fixations of expert and novice referees were different. CONCLUSIONS According to the results of this study, it can be concluded that the difference in visual search behavior of expert and novice referees was one of the factors contributing to better decision making of expert referees.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据