ArticleScientific reports2025
Social post-error adaptations across four NBA basketball seasons.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Sharing errors with human and non-human agents.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Article
- Right but Still Lousy: Correct Responses With an Unfavorable Outcome Elicit an Error Positivity.Psychophysiology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Error monitoring, a crucial aspect of behavioral regulation, has been studied extensively in cognitive psychology and neuroscience. Lab studies often observe that people become more cautious after both own and others' errors. Moreover, social error monitoring research suggests that cooperation elicits stronger adaptations to others' errors than competition. However, these insights primarily stem from controlled reaction time tasks, limiting generalization to real-world social settings. To address this, we investigated whether basketball players become more cautious after missing compared to making shots, and whether these adaptations differ when the miss was by themselves, teammates or opponents. Meta-analyses of four NBA-seasons revealed increased caution in terms of shot distance and angle following missed compared to made shots, with the most pronounced effect after own, next teammates' and last opponents' errors. While controlling for rebound shots reduced the effects, the general pattern remained. Additional analyses also revealed a positive correlation between post-error caution and accuracy, suggesting post-error caution may serve to improve shooting accuracy. These findings not only extend cognitive theories from controlled settings to a real-word sport setting, but also provide a crucial understanding of athletes' social error responses thereby paving the way for research aimed at optimizing this aspect of performance.
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.