Tackling Quiet Eye issues on a functional level – comment on Vickers

Abstract

A B S T R AC TJoan Vickers (2016) pinpoints the Quiet Eye´s (QE) relation to superior learning and performance in numerous motor tasks. On this basis, this commentary emphasises that future research should particularly focus on underlying mechanisms to increase our understanding of the QE phenomenon. To this end, we suggest to pursue a functional approach that tackles the QE on a behavioural level by advancing theoretical as well as methodological aspects. Consequently, (a) an inhibition hypothesis will be outlined that supposes the QE to "shield" the parametrisation of the optimal task solution against alternative movement variants; (b) an algorithmic approach to the study of gaze behaviour will be introduced that maximises data quality and minimises manual analysis effort; and (c) a peripheral perspective on the QE will be depicted suggesting QE functionalities beyond foveal information processing. Keywords: perception-action coupling -gaze behaviour -inhibition hypothesis -peripheral visioneye tracking technologyOver the last decades, positive effects of a gaze strategy called the Quiet Eye (QE) have been found for motor performance on an inter-and intra-individual level. As elaborated by Vickers (2016), this phenomenon highlights the relevance of the tight coupling between perception and action for superior motor behaviour. The QE´s functionality has been shown for a large range of motor tasks like dart throwing and golf putting (for a recent overview, see Rienhoff, Tirp, Strauss, Baker, & Schorer, 2016); and, first and foremost, Joan Vickers has a large share in unravelling this phenomenon (Vickers, 2007). However, a number of recent studies revealed that the relation between the QE and performance is not as monotonic as suggested (for recent overviews, see Gonzales et al., 2015, Wilson, Causer, & Vickers, 2015. Thus, instead of isolating the QE in further motor tasks or of searching for QE correlates on a neural level -as both suggested by Vickers (2016) -we would find it more fruitful to elaborate theoretical frameworks on the behavioural level that allow to experimentally test specific predictions in order to extend our understanding of the mechanisms underlying the QE. This commentary will outline such a framework by suggesting an explanation on a functional level, presenting respective empirical and measuring methods and providing an outlook on future research questions by introducing a "peripheral perspective" on the QE.

A critical analysis of the functional parameters of the quiet eye using immersive virtual reality

“…As all aspects of the virtual environment can be tracked, virtual reality also supports the automation of calculating QE duration (e.g. see Kredel et al, 2015), answering calls from some researchers to replace manual coding of gaze with algorithmic approaches (Klostermann et al, 2016). In two studies we aimed to use the experimental control afforded by virtual reality to examine the competing predictions of the response programming and attentional control explanations of QE (and, more broadly, the outward-in versus inward-out role for QE) by manipulating the spatial and temporal parameters of the final fixation.…”

“…When throwing a ball, shooting a weapon or controlling a surgical instrument a long, stable fixation has been proposed as a critical period for planning and controlling the motor response (Gonzalez et al, 2017;Vickers, 1996a;Williams et al, 2002). Yet, despite numerous studies examining this phenomenon, the exact manner in which the QE fixation provides performance benefits remains unclear (Klostermann et al, 2016;Rienhoff et al, 2016;Wilson et al, 2016).…”

A critical analysis of the functional parameters of the quiet eye using immersive virtual reality.

“…When throwing a ball, shooting a weapon or controlling a surgical instrument a long, stable fixation has been proposed as a critical period for planning and controlling the motor response (Gonzalez et al, 2017; Vickers, 1996b; Williams et al, 2002). Yet, despite numerous studies examining this phenomenon, the exact manner in which the QE fixation provides performance benefits remains unclear (Klostermann et al, 2016; Rienhoff et al, 2016; Wilson et al, 2016).…”

“…Previous QE studies have used semivirtual tasks (e.g., targets on a screen; Klostermann et al, 2013; Klostermann & Hossner, 2018) and simulations (e.g., surgical and military simulators; Moore et al, 2014; Wilson et al, 2011), and the current approach builds on this work by adopting a fully immersive, high-fidelity virtual reality golf putting simulation (Harris et al, 2020). As all aspects of the virtual environment can be tracked, virtual reality also supports the automation of calculating QE duration (e.g., see Kredel et al, 2015), answering calls from some researchers to replace manual coding of gaze with algorithmic approaches (Klostermann et al, 2016). In two studies we aimed to use the experimental control afforded by virtual reality to examine the competing predictions of the response programming and attentional control explanations of QE (and, more broadly, the outward-in vs. inward-out role for QE) by manipulating the spatial and temporal parameters of the final fixation.…”

‘Success is in the eye of the beholder’: A special issue on the quiet eye

“…interceptive tasks) there may be important differences in the use of tools (shooting vs throwing) or the direction of travel of the intercepted object (towards when catching vs away when shooting) that demand a different and specific form of visuo‐motor control for proficiency. A particular challenge in future research resides in developing a single overriding theoretical framework that considers the multiple mechanisms at play in the range of skills that are used (see Klostermann, Vater, & Kredel, in press).…”