Judgement utility modulates the use of explicit contextual priors and visual information during anticipation

Gredin, N. Viktor; Broadbent, David P.; Williams, A. Mark; Bishop, Daniel

doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2019.101578

Cited by 20 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It may be that the interdependency between stable and dynamic contextual priors and the evolving kinematic information moderate the cognitive load associated with the taskbut future research is required to confirm this. Finally, the utility associated with people's judgements is likely to distort their inference of the reliability conveyed by contextual priors and visual information (Russo & Yong, 2011) and seems to bias anticipatory judgements in favour of high-utility options (Canãl-Bruland et al, 2015;Gredin et al, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…higher utility of predicting a fastball than a changeup in baseball) may bias athletes' anticipatory judgements; however, the extent to which it modulates the effects of contextual priors, and processing priorities, during task performance was not explored in this study. Gredin et al (2019) examined the impact of judgement utility on expert soccer players' integration of stable and dynamic contextual priors with kinematic information as they anticipated an oncoming opponent's imminent actions. Utility was informed by the location on the pitch in which the action took place (i.e.…”

Section: Judgement Utilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The use of contextual priors and kinematic information during anticipation in sport: toward a Bayesian integration framework

Gredin¹,

Bishop

Williams

et al. 2020

International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Judgement Utilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of contextual priors and kinematic information during anticipation in sport: toward a Bayesian integration framework

Gredin¹,

Bishop

Williams

et al. 2020

International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…To utilise this stable contextual prior, players had to use the positioning of the opponent off the ball (i.e., a dynamic contextual prior). The explicit provision of information about opponent action tendencies altered players' allocation of overt visual attention, towards the opponent off the ball, and biased their anticipatory judgements towards the most likely action, given the opponent's action tendencies, which resulted in enhanced performance on the task (see also Gredin et al, 2020Gredin et al, , 2019. Gredin et al (2018) demonstrated that the impact of explicit contextual priors was greater early in the trial, while the players relied more upon evolving kinematic information later in the trial (i.e., closer to the key point of action).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating explicit contextual priors and kinematic information during anticipation

Gredin

Bishop

Williams

et al. 2020

Journal of Sports Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the interaction between explicit contextual priors and kinematic information during anticipation in soccer. We employed a video-based anticipation task where skilled soccer players had to predict the direction of the imminent actions of an attacking opponent in possession of the ball. The players performed the task both with and without explicit contextual priors pertaining to the opponent's action tendencies. The strength of the opponent's action tendencies was altered in order to manipulate the reliability of contextual priors (low vs. high). Moreover, the reliability of kinematic information (low vs. high) was manipulated using the temporal occlusion paradigm. The explicit provision of contextual priors biased anticipation towards the most likely direction, given the opponent's action tendencies, and resulted in enhanced performance. This effect was greater under conditions where the reliability of kinematic information was low rather than high. When the reliability of kinematic information was high, the players used explicit contextual priors of high, but not low, reliability to inform their judgements. Findings suggest that athletes employ reliability-based strategies when integrating contextual priors with kinematic information during anticipation. The impact of explicit contextual priors is dependent on the reliability both of the priors and the evolving kinematic information.

show abstract

“…These findings go in line with other studies (Mann et al, 2014 ; Loffing et al, 2015b ; Runswick et al, 2019 ) and support the idea that instructing about opponents' action preferences influences visual anticipation. While the exact mechanism underlying that effect remain unclear, recent explanations center around a Bayesian approach (Loffing and Hagemann, 2014 ; Gredin et al, 2019 ; Helm et al, 2020 ) or heuristics such as confirmation bias (Rajsic et al, 2015 ; Runswick et al, 2019 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Influence of Action Preference on Female Players' Gaze Behavior During Defense of Volleyball Attacks

Lüders

Schorer

Loffing

2020

Front. Sports Act. Living

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge of an opponent's action preference may affect visual anticipation of their action outcome. Specifically, if an opponent acts according to their purported preference, anticipation may be facilitated. Conversely, if an opponent does not act according to their purported preference, anticipation may be unaffected or even harmed. The underlying perceptual-cognitive mechanisms of that effect, however, remain unclear. Here we tested the hypothesis that players might change their gaze behavior once provided with preference information. To this end, 27 female volleyball players anticipated the direction of attacks in two test blocks with 40 videos each. Videos were shown on a large screen and stopped 240 ms prior to hand-ball-contact. Participants simulated defensive reaction while their gaze was recorded using a mobile eye-tracker. One female attacker directed 75% of shots diagonally (25% longline), while another female attacker distributed shots equally to both directions. After block one, half of the participants were informed that either both attackers preferred diagonal shots in 75% of occasions (group preferred) or that both attackers distributed shots equally across directions (group non-preferred). Analysis of decision behavior (i.e., proportion of diagonal decisions), but not prediction accuracy (i.e., proportion of correct predictions), revealed that those instructions led both groups decide differently according to the purported preferences from block 1 to block 2. Analysis of gaze behavior did not reveal group-specific effects across blocks or attackers with/-out action preference. Findings underline the influence of contextual information on anticipation, but they leave open whether the availability of contextual information similarly affects gaze behavior.

show abstract

Judgement utility modulates the use of explicit contextual priors and visual information during anticipation

Cited by 20 publications

References 27 publications

The use of contextual priors and kinematic information during anticipation in sport: toward a Bayesian integration framework

The use of contextual priors and kinematic information during anticipation in sport: toward a Bayesian integration framework

Integrating explicit contextual priors and kinematic information during anticipation

On the Influence of Action Preference on Female Players' Gaze Behavior During Defense of Volleyball Attacks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About