ArticlePeerJ2025
The influence of basketball players' tracking speed ability on sports decision performance.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Performance of clay pigeon shooters in multiple object tracking under different target loads: skill level and gender differences.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The running speed of basketball players plays a critical role in shaping the complexity and dynamics of game situations. This study aims to examine the relationship between players' tracking speed capabilities and the quality of their decision-making during gameplay. Methods: Employing an expert-novice paradigm, Experiment 1 assessed tracking accuracy in a multiple object tracking (MOT) task at three angular velocities: 5°/s, 10°/s, and 15°/s. Experiment 2 evaluated decision-making accuracy under three distinct running speed conditions: low speed (0.67-3.98 m/s), medium speed (3.99-7.97 m/s), and high speed (7.98-12.62 m/s). Results: In Experiment 1, expert players demonstrated significantly higher tracking accuracy (60.42 ± 13.98%) than novice players (41.25 ± 13.93%) at 10°/s ( Conclusion: This study shows that expert basketball players display superior visual attention and decision-making in moderate-to-high complexity settings, extending dynamic sport cognition theory. The absence of differences at 5°/s and 15°/s suggests task boundary effects. Future work should examine player position and gender to refine perceptual-cognitive training and theoretical models.
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.