Ebbinghaus visual illusion: no robust influence on novice golf-putting performance

Maquestiaux, François; Arexis, Mahé; Chauvel, Guillaume; Ladoy, Josepha; Boyer, Pierrick; Mazerolle, Marie

doi:10.1007/s00426-020-01298-0

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We did not survey participants on their experience with these kinds of video games. Experiment 1a of Maquestiaux et al (2020) found that after closely matching Witt et al's (2012) experimental setup, participants with no prior golf experience were unable to successfully put a single ball out after 10 attempts. By contrast, in Experiment 1, participants were able to hit the target roughly one third of trials across conditions.…”

Section: Pse -Angular Errormentioning

confidence: 52%

“…Li Prior golf-putting studies observed that the comparatively enhanced performance towards a hole surrounded by a small surround only occurs with participants with prior putting experience (Wood et al, 2013), but not with participants with no experience (Maquestiaux et al, 2020). The initial study that found an effect of the surround did not report the experience-level of participants (Witt et al, 2012).…”

Section: Pse -Angular Errormentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Recent research has extended these questions to sporting contexts such as golf-putting, marble shooting, and competitive shooting (Bahmani et al, 2017;Cañal-Bruland et al, 2016;Chauvel et al, 2015;Maquestiaux et al, 2020;Witt et al, 2012;Wood et al, 2013). Unlike prior research, the kind of motor movements performed in these studies involve manipulating an object to contact a target.…”

Section: Ebbinghaus Illusion and Actions At A Distancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…They found no difference between the groups on the first testing day, but on the following day the group that practiced with the perceptually larger hole were more accurate and reported higher self-efficacy. Maquestiaux et al (2020) used a similar design with a golf-putting task to Witt et al, (2012), except using participants who were novices to the golf-putting. They found no effect, even with a shortened distance between the participant and the hole and simultaneous presentation of the small-and large-surround configurations to enhance the illusory effect.…”

Section: Ebbinghaus Illusion and Actions At A Distancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The present study introduces several key manipulations overlooked in previous studies (Bahmani et al, 2017;Cañal-Bruland & van der Kamp, 2009;Chauvel et al, 2015;Maquestiaux et al, 2020;Witt et al, 2012;Wood et al, 2013) which can directly compare a perception-based account and interferencebased account. In their between-group design, Cañal-Bruland et al (2016) found no effect of a surround on performance, with groups shooting towards large, small, and no surround targets.…”

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Perceived size does not modulate accuracy in a two-dimensional shooting task

Urale¹,

Schwarzkopf²

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research suggests superior performance with sports movements, such as shooting and golf-putting, for targets surrounded by small shapes (leading to a perceptually larger target), compared to large shapes (perceptually smaller target). One explanation is that these effects are driven by the Ebbinghaus illusion modulating perceived target size. Here we examine this assumption with a digital shooting game where participants aimed a ‘laser gun’ towards a target. We manipulated perceived target size either with a Ebbinghaus-style surround or changing physical target size. Aiming performance was noticeably worse with large Ebbinghaus surround. However, changing physical target size did not affect performance, suggesting these effects were driven by the presence of the surround rather perceived target size per se. Individual illusion magnitude was also uncorrelated with aiming performance. Further experiments demonstrated that interference of target perception by the surround (visual crowding) instead explains altered performance. Our results should motivate reinterpretations of previous studies purporting an effect of perceived size without controlling for the confounding contextual effects.

show abstract

Section: Pse -Angular Errormentioning

confidence: 52%

Section: Pse -Angular Errormentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Ebbinghaus Illusion and Actions At A Distancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ebbinghaus Illusion and Actions At A Distancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Perceived size does not modulate accuracy in a two-dimensional shooting task

Urale¹,

Schwarzkopf²

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Different task success criteria affect expectancies of success but do not improve golf putting performance

Ziv

Lidor

2021

Psychology of Sport and Exercise

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Effect of Large Visual Illusion and External Focus of Attention on Gaze Behavior and Learning of Dart Throw Skill

Bahrami

Abdoli

Farsi

et al. 2022

Journal of Motor Learning and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research has shown that large visual illusions and an external focus of attention can improve novice’s motor learning. However, the combined effects of these approaches and the underlying mechanisms have yet to be studied. Therefore, the present study examined the effects of a large visual illusion and an external focus on the learning of a dart throwing task in novices and measured the perceptual mechanisms underpinning learning using quiet eye. Forty novice participants were randomly divided into four groups: large visual illusion, external focus of attention, combined large visual illusion and external focus of attention, and control group. The study consisted of a pretest, a practice phase, an immediate retention test, a 24-hr retention test, and a transfer test. Results revealed that all groups increased throwing accuracy and quiet eye duration from pretest to immediate retention. In the immediate retention, 24-hr retention, and transfer test, large visual illusion had greater accuracy and longer quiet eye duration than the control group. In addition, there were no significant differences between the visual illusion and external focus groups for throwing accuracy and quiet eye duration. The findings suggest that combining large visual illusion and external focus can independently improve motor learning but combining these manipulations does not have additive benefits.

show abstract

Ebbinghaus visual illusion: no robust influence on novice golf-putting performance

Cited by 5 publications

References 18 publications

Perceived size does not modulate accuracy in a two-dimensional shooting task

Perceived size does not modulate accuracy in a two-dimensional shooting task

Different task success criteria affect expectancies of success but do not improve golf putting performance

The Effect of Large Visual Illusion and External Focus of Attention on Gaze Behavior and Learning of Dart Throw Skill

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About