Psych - Decision Making in Sport Flashcards
What is decision making essentially?
Selecting + integrating the most useful info
- ignoring irrelevant / misleading info
What are the 2 most important parts of decision making?
Decision time and decision accuracy
Describe the decision making process
- Presentation (of visual info - involves scanning)
- Identification (of any constraints)
- eneration of various possibilities
- Considering / weighing up what’s best option
- Selecting best response
- Initiating an action
- Evaluating whether it was a good or bad decision
What’s the experts difference with regard to decision making?
Experts appear to have perceptual-cognitive expertise
- ability to perceive relevant info, ignore irrelevant info + use knowledge to select best action
Who said that elite performers have excellent technique and decision making?
Poulton, 1957
What did Baker et al (2003) say that ‘good decision makers’ do?
They read the play and select the most appropriate option under pressure
Go into more detail about how experts are different in decision making
- Can better predict future events + outcomes (Williams et al, 1999)
- Identify tactical structures + understand meaning of certain players’ locations
- Superior perceptual-cognitive skills (Mann et al, 2007)
- different visual search strategies
- Better pattern recognition + recall skills
DM Study - study on chess players having to recall chess piece positions after seeing results for just 5 secs
Results
De Groot (1967)
Experts had better recall of chess positions
- but the advantage disappeared for random board configurations (less meaningful)
Experts had better knowledge of tactical relations - so fewer ‘chunks’ of info to retain and recall (Chase + Simon, 1973)
- When there was more ‘chunks’ available = much quicker recall (as had to recall ‘7’ chunks instead of 32 chess pieces
DM Study - female uni basketball and non-basketball players compared on pattern recognition + recall on structured unstructured still images
Results
Allard (1980)
- When structured scenario was seen - accuracy was better for better players
- Advantage disappears for better players in unstructured image
DM Study - Canadian women’s field hockey team vs uni first team vs novices in which they underwent perceptual + cognitive tests (structured + unstructured images)
Starkes (1987)
National team had slower simple reaction times than uni and novices (hardware issue)
- but no advantage to having a faster reaction time (this isn’t defining factor)
National team were better at recall of game structure (software advantage)
- this is what the advantage was
Difference for expertise was greater for structured sequences than unstructured sequences
DM Study - High vs low skilled players vs spectators with a physical activity shown 20 clips of structured attack sequences ending with a pass/shot + unstructured clips
What was measured?
Williams + Davids (1995)
DV = radial error of important player positions (how far away from original in clips they were)
DM Study - High vs low skilled players vs spectators with a physical activity shown 20 clips of structured attack sequences ending with a pass/shot + unstructured clips
results
- Skilled players were better at anticipating final pass direction
- Recall error - high skilled < low skilled < spectators
- expertise effect most evident in structured clips
so to summarise - extensive football knowledge base creates this better recognition of meaningful associations (playing is better than just watching)
DM Study - skilled vs recreational footballers doing a recognition test whereby superficial info was removed (people replaced by dots + no crowd) and relational info disrupted
Main Result
Williams (2006)
Skilled footballers had faster + more accurate recognition of structured patterns both in full video + point light video test
DM Study - skilled vs recreational footballers doing a recognition test whereby superficial info was removed (people replaced by dots + no crowd) and relational info disrupted
Did removal of important info impair recognition performance + what was effect of spatial occlusion?
Williams (2006)
- recognition accuracy decreased from 75 to 63% so only ‘distorted’ access to important relational info
Effect of spatial occlusion (removing 2 key defenders / attackers) on response times was greater for skilled players
- less skilled had better performances across all 3 conditions
- experts made use of meaningful associations involving key players
DM Study - comparing recall ability of expert and novice basketball players (image + video clips)
What did participants have to do?
Gorman (2012)
Recall final locations of all players in an image + in video clips
- final positions were same for image + video clips but in video clips, participants got to see what was going on beforehand
DM Study - comparing recall ability of expert and novice basketball players (image + video clips)
Results
Gorman, 2012
- Experts advantage was seen for both images and videos
- Errors were larger for videos (both experts + novices performed worse)
- therefore preceding info did not help
DM Study - elite vs sub-elite vs amateur GKs having to identify the shooter as play evolves at different time-periods before shot (10,8,6,4,2 secs before shot)
Results
Murphy (2024)
Identification of likely shooter became progressively earlier as GK expertise increased
- 6 secs before - elites had roughly 40% accuracy of guessing correct shooter
- reached almost 100% accuracy 2secs before shot (other GKs were at 80-90%)
What are heuristics?
A cognitive mental shortcut that allow people to make judgements quickly + efficiently
What are the 3 theoretical frameworks surrounding heuristics?
- Information Processing
- Naturalistic DM
- Ecological dynamics
Describe ecological dynamics (Heuristics)
The direct perception of info in the environment (people just see and react)
- therefore perception + action must be coupled
Describe Naturalistic DM (Heuristics)
- mention study on firefighters
Essentially the more real-world context DM that occurs in time-pressured situations whereby individuals use previous experience to make decision as opposed to logical reasoning
(Klein + Klinger, 1990)
- firefighters were often acting quickly based on previous experience (not going through steps of info-processing model)
- but this type of DM is much slower than seen in sporting context
What are the 3 levels of decision making (ways to do it essentially)?
- Situation typical (recognise - respond) - most often
- Situation typical (recognise - evaluate via mental stimulation - respond)
- Situation not typical (unfamiliar / changed - assess - evaluate - respond)
Evidence for recognition-primed-decision model in team sport
Post-match interview with 7 expert volleyball players as they watched match footage
Macquet (2009) found that a large majority of decisions were level 1 (rapid-recognition decisions)
Heuristics - take the first or select the best?
Raab + Johnson (2007) showed that extensive experience strengthens the link between situation + (correct) option = first likely to be best
- 60% of handball players ‘take the first’ when making decisions
Heuristics - less is more or more is more?
Study on German + Brazilian academy football players (56)
explain study
Klatt et al (2019)
- asked for first option on decision and then given an extra 45 secs to think of any other options
Heuristics - less is more or more is more?
Study on German + Brazilian academy football players (56)
Results
Klatt et al (2019)
Quality of first option correlated with number of options generated
- people who could generate more options had more extensive memory representation of that scenario, but still selecting best one
Evidence for hierarchy of probabilities assigned to successive options (pretty accurate at going down from best to next best option etc)
Biases - are refs unconsciously bias?
Explain a study on this
Poolton et al, 2011
28 refs shown 45 video clips of possible fouls in which crowd noise / players / official responses were eliminated but refs were told which team were home
- used a DSRS to understand if refs were ruminators or not (repetitively think about problems etc)
Biases study - 28 refs shown 45 video clips of possible fouls in which crowd noise / players / official responses were eliminated but refs were told which team were home
Results
Poolton et al (2011)
- Only high ruminators showed a home team bias
- possible individual differences (think about past ‘wrong’ decisions, listen to crowd noise etc)
Biases study - observed 60 England netball superleague matches with 15 umpires
Explain a bit more
Burnett et al (2017)
10 umpires completed the DSRS of 15
range of contextual influences identified - home / away, competition round, crowd size, league positions + match quarter that may influence decisions by umpires
Biases study - observed 60 England netball superleague matches with 15 umpires
Results
Burnett et al (2017)
- High decision ruminators were more likely to ‘swallow the whistle’ in Q1 and Q3 (not make decisions)
- Less decisions made against home team in Q1 and Q3
- This bias reversed in Q2 and Q4 - high ruminators are less consistent? or aiming to balance it out?
Visual search behaviour study - semi pro vs novice football players in microstate situations (3vs3, 4vs4, set plays)
results
Helsen + Pauwels (1983)
- Experts had faster movement initiation times + higher decision accuracy
- had better recognition of structure
- more efficient visual search (fewer fixations of longer durations)
Visual search behaviour study - skilled vs recreational players observing 11vs11 attacking players
Results
Williams et al (1984)
The pattern reverses in more complex scenes
- skilled players had faster DM but now making more fixations of shorter duration (scanning the field)
- Recreational players had more time ‘ball watching’ than skilled players (64 vs 49%)
How do tactical constraints affect visual search + DM?
Elite, sub-elite + regional players who were either successful or unsuccessful - watched clips of different offensive plays in football and had to make decision (pass, shoot or dribble)
Results
Vaeyens (2007)
Successful players had a faster search rate + more ‘exhaustive’ search pattern
- Much more consistent across less complex scenarios + quicker to find meaning in complex scenarios
- accuracy was consistent for successful players as scenarios became more complex
- search rate was faster for more complex scenarios
Long term working memory theory on visual behaviours - skilled vs recreational participants had to say what their thought processes were as they’re doing it
11 vs 11 scenarios either ‘near’ or ‘far’ from play
Results
Roca et al (2013)
- Skilled players had more fixation of shorter duration in far task and fewer fixations of loner duration in near task
- more locations noticed in faraway task compared to near
- skilled players are highly sensitive to changes in visual field
- recreational players are seen to ball / player watch more
Roles of central + peripheral vision in DM - visual search behaviours study
Skilled vs recreational basketball players watching 7 sec videos of ‘pass’ or ‘drive’ decision
Results
Ryu, 2013
- Skilled players made faster + more accurate decisions in all conditions (full vision, moving window across screen (only central) and moving task (only peripheral)
- more adept at using both central + peripheral info
