ArticleJournal of human kinetics2024
Cognitive Development and Decision Making in Basketball: A Comparison between Male Players with and without Intellectual Impairment and across Different Age-Groups.
Article in Journal of human kinetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Breaking Barriers: Understanding the Impact of Intellectual Impairment on Inductive Reasoning in Basketball.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Exploring the relationship between cognitive abilities and motor performance in athletes with intellectual disabilities.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the role of age and intellectual impairment (II) in decision-making in basketball. The current study investigated differences in decision making between equally well-trained adult basketball male players with intellectual impairment (players with II) (n = 93), adults without II (senior) (n = 44) and youth basketball players (under-14, n = 31; under-16, n = 25; under-18, n = 30). A computer test was developed composed by 20 photographs displaying various basketball game-situations, and participants had to decide as fast as possible what the player in ball possession should do: dribble, pass or shoot. Decision time and accuracy were recorded for every situation. Players with II had slower decision time (3.8 ± 1.8 s vs. 1.5 ± 0.5 s, p < 0.001) and less decision-making accuracy (15.7 ± 2.8 correct decisions vs. 17.9 ± 1.2 correct decisions, p < 0.001) compared to senior players without II. Discriminant analysis with speed and accuracy as independent variables classified 91.2% (CCA = 0.769) of the players correctly into their group: players with II or players without II. A Spearman correlation revealed that age correlated significantly (p < 0.001) with the number of correct decisions (rs = 0.269) and mean decision time (rs = -0.331). Our findings support that decision making in basketball develops with age and experience, but is significantly deteriorated in experienced adult players who have II. Decision-making should be considered as an important eligibility criterion to participate in competitive basketball events for male players with II.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.