Comparison of Visual Search Behavior and Decision-making Accuracy in Expert and Novice Fencing Referees

A comparison of perceptual-cognitive skills in expert and non-expert sports officials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

The purpose of this study is to systematically compare and assess the differences in perceptual-cognitive skills between expert and non-expert sports officials, and further explore the potential differences caused by different types of sports officials, in order to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the perceptual-cognitive skills of sports officials.

Methods

Relevant literature published before 31 December 2022 was searched in four English databases. Review Manager 5.4 and Stata 12.0 software were used for meta-analysis and bias test.

Results

Expert sports officials are significantly more accurate in their decision-making than non-expert sports officials, and exhibit a large amount of effect size (SMD = 1.09; 95%CI: 0.52, 1.66; P < 0.05). Expert sports officials had significantly fewer number of fixations than non-expert sports officials and showed a moderate amount of effect size (SMD = 0.71; 95%CI: 1.25, 0.17; P < 0.05). Expert sports officials' duration of fixation (SMD = 0.23; 95%CI: 0.25, 0.71; P = 0.35) were not significantly different from non-expert sports officials.

Discussion

It can be seen that there are differences in the Perceptual-cognitive skills of expert and non-expert sports officials. Decision-making accuracy can serve as an important indicator for distinguishing the perceptual-cognitive skills of expert and non-expert sports officials. Number of fixations can serve as important indicators to differentiate the perceptual-cognitive skills of monitors.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=418594, identifier: CRD42023418594.

Eye-tracking technology and the dynamics of natural gaze behavior in sports: an update 2016-2022

Updating and complementing a previous review on eye-tracking technology and the dynamics of natural gaze behavior in sports, this short review focuses on the progress concerning researched sports tasks, applied methods of gaze data collection and analysis as well as derived gaze measures for the time interval of 2016-2022. To that end, a systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines was conducted, searching Web of Science, PubMed Central, SPORTDiscus, and ScienceDirect for the keywords: eye tracking, gaze behavio*r, eye movement, and visual search. Thirty-one studies were identified for the review. On the one hand, a generally increased research interest and a wider area of researched sports with a particular increase in official's gaze behavior were diagnosed. On the other hand, a general lack of progress concerning sample sizes, amounts of trials, employed eye-tracking technology and gaze analysis procedures must be acknowledged. Nevertheless, first attempts to automated gaze-cue-allocations (GCA) in mobile eye-tracking studies were seen, potentially enhancing objectivity, and alleviating the burden of manual workload inherently associated with conventional gaze analyses. Reinforcing the claims of the previous review, this review concludes by describing four distinct technological approaches to automating GCA, some of which are specifically suited to tackle the validity and generalizability issues associated with the current limitations of mobile eye-tracking studies on natural gaze behavior in sports.

A comparison of perceptual anticipation in combat sports between experts and non-experts: A systematic review and meta-analysis

In order to systematically evaluate perceptual anticipation between experts and non-experts for different kinds of combat sports, we needed to perform a comprehensive assessment. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched four English-language and three Chinese-language databases that used expert/non-expert research paradigms, to explore perceptual anticipation in combat sports. We employed a random effects model for pooled analyses using the inverse variance method. We included 27 eligible studies involving 233 datasets in this meta-analysis. We observed large effect sizes for the differences between experts and non-experts in both response accuracy (1.51; 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.87, p < 0.05) and reaction time (-0.91; 95% CI: −1.08 to−0.73, p < 0.05). We also observed substantial differences between experts and non-experts in the mean duration of visual fixations per trial (1.51; 95% CI: −2.40 to −0.63, p < 0.05), but not in the visual fixation duration (0.16; −061 to 0.92, p = 0.69). Taken together, high-level combat athletes have more advantages in perceptual anticipation than lower-level athletes, showing faster and more accurate responses when facing the opponent's attacks, as well as focusing on fewer points of visual fixations than novice athletes. Different types of combat sports and stimulus presentations affect perceptual anticipation abilities to varying extents in relation to outcome measures, with more pronounced expertise in a stimulus that is closer to real-world situations.