Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38842836›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2024

The role of prediction and visual tracking strategies during manual interception: An exploration of individual differences.

Tom Arthur, Samuel Vine, Mark Wilson, David Harris

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tom ArthurSchool of Public Health and Sport Sciences, Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Samuel VineSchool of Public Health and Sport Sciences, Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Mark WilsonSchool of Public Health and Sport Sciences, Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
David HarrisSchool of Public Health and Sport Sciences, Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The interception (or avoidance) of moving objects is a common component of various daily living tasks; however, it remains unclear whether precise alignment of foveal vision with a target is important for motor performance. Furthermore, there has also been little examination of individual differences in visual tracking strategy and the use of anticipatory gaze adjustments. We examined the importance of in-flight tracking and predictive visual behaviors using a virtual reality environment that required participants (n = 41) to intercept tennis balls projected from one of two possible locations. Here, we explored whether different tracking strategies spontaneously arose during the task, and which were most effective. Although indices of closer in-flight tracking (pursuit gain, tracking coherence, tracking lag, and saccades) were predictive of better interception performance, these relationships were rather weak. Anticipatory gaze shifts toward the correct release location of the ball provided no benefit for subsequent interception. Nonetheless, two interceptive strategies were evident: 1) early anticipation of the ball's onset location followed by attempts to closely track the ball in flight (i.e., predictive strategy); or 2) positioning gaze between possible onset locations and then using peripheral vision to locate the moving ball (i.e., a visual pivot strategy). Despite showing much poorer in-flight foveal tracking of the ball, participants adopting a visual pivot strategy performed slightly better in the task. Overall, these results indicate that precise alignment of the fovea with the target may not be critical for interception tasks, but that observers can adopt quite varied visual guidance approaches.

Indexed as

IndividualityMotion PerceptionAdultEye MovementsFemaleFixation, OcularFovea CentralisHumansMalePsychomotor PerformanceSaccadesVirtual RealityYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID38842836
PMCPMC11160954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.