ArticleScientific reports2025
Tennis expert-novice difference in motion-in-depth perception is associated with early inhibition of invalid attention.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The mind's clock in sport: a narrative review of temporal processing across athletic disciplines.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Perception of motion-in-depth is essential to guide and modify the hitting action in interceptive-dominated sports (e.g., tennis). The purpose of this research was to investigate the effect of tennis expertise on motion-in-depth perception at different cognition processes by two event-related potential (ERP) studies. Specifically, the study explored differences in behavior and electroencephalogram (EEG) characteristics between tennis experts and novices under two different task conditions. Seventeen skilled tennis players (average professional experience: 10.76 ± 2.56 years) and 17 age-matched novices participated in two experiments. Cortical activity (P1, N1, P2, and the later component) and task performance (reaction time, accuracy rate, and error value) were recorded when participants completed a direction-identifying task (Experiment 1) and a prediction-motion task (Experiment 2) while perceiving motion-in-depth. Results demonstrated that P1 latency in the expert group was significantly shorter than the novice group in experiment 1; and in experiment 2, the expert group showed shorter P1 latency than the novice group under the TTC1 (actual time-to-collision is 400 ms) condition. The results indicate that the effect of tennis expertise on motion-in-depth perception was primarily manifested as early visual attentional investment in the features of objects. Experts have the rapid inbibition of invalid attention.
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.