The Impact of Video Speed on the Estimation of Time Duration in Sport

Abstract

The authors investigated the impact of video speed on judging the duration of sport performance. In three experiments, they investigated whether the speed of video presentation (slow motion vs. real time) has an influence on the accuracy of time estimation of sporting activities (n1 = 103; n2 = 100; n3 = 106). In all three studies, the time estimation was more accurate in real time than in slow motion, in which time was overestimated. In two studies, the authors initially investigated whether actions in slow motion are perceived to last longer because the distance they cycled or ran is perceived to be longer (n4 = 92; n5 = 106). The results support the hypothesis that the duration of sporting activities is estimated more accurately when they are presented in real time than in slow motion. Sporting officials’ judgments that require accurate time estimation may thus be biased when based on slow-motion displays.

Slow motion bias: Exploring the relation between time overestimation and increased perceived intentionality

“…The study replicated previous findings that durations are rated longer (Schütz et al, 2021;Sperl et al, 2021) and actions are perceived as more intentional (Caruso et al, 2016) when videos are presented in slow motion. We further found a similar trend as in our recent study, showing that information about the slow motion factor can reduce the bias on absolute time, but-contrary to our hypotheses-not on relative time or intentionality ratings potentially questioning the causal dependence of the intentionality bias on subjective expansion of absolute time.…”

“…The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of explicit video speed information on intentionality ratings and time estimation. Specifically, we wanted to replicate the findings by Caruso et al (2016) showing that (i) actions appear to take longer and (ii) are rated as more intentional when replayed in slow motion (for related findings, see also, Schütz et al, 2021; Spitz et al, 2018). We additionally aimed at replicating the findings by Sperl et al (2021) suggesting that (iii) this bias on duration estimation can be reduced or even eliminated when informing participants about the factor by which the video was slowed down.…”

“…The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of explicit video speed information on intentionality ratings and time estimation. Specifically, we wanted to replicate the findings by Caruso et al (2016) showing that (i) actions appear to take longer and (ii) are rated as more intentional when replayed in slow motion (for related findings, see also, Schütz et al, 2021;Spitz et al, 2018).…”

“…All in all, while this study is one of very few investigating biases of intentionality and time due to slow motion replay (Caruso et al, 2016;Mather & Breivik, 2020;Schütz et al, 2021;Spitz et al, 2017Spitz et al, , 2018 and certainly revealed valuable new insights into the interplay of different variables influencing subjective time processing and ratings of actors' intentions, further research is needed to more deeply understand how the different variables are intertwined and how, why, and under which circumstances these biases emerge. In fact, many open questions arise, methodology offers alternative pathways and there is a lot of potential for future research to build on.…”

“…With regard to instant replays in sports, there is evidence that slowed down videos can distort the viewer's perception of how long an action originally took. Specifically, when presented in slow motion, the displayed actions are often perceived to last longer than they actually do (see, e.g., Caruso et al, 2016; Schütz et al, 2021; Sperl et al, 2021). This means that the same action is rated as lasting longer when watched in slow motion compared to original speed, despite being aware that the original duration is obviously lengthened due to altered video speed.…”