ArticlePloS one2026
Applying team strategies for dynamic coordination: A comparative study of expertise using 3-on-3 basketball.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans working as a team can achieve higher performance. Studies in sports science, network science, and machine learning have extracted dynamic physical interaction structures of such coordination in team sports. However, the information processing, such as the application of team strategies, has not been fully discussed. The purpose of this cognitive science study was to investigate the application of team strategies for dynamic coordination across different expertise levels using 3-on-3 basketball. In a field experiment, female players, who were selected as prefecture representatives in Japan (Average experience 19.33 years, [Formula: see text] = 4.09), repeatedly engaged in mini-games. Their previous and current affiliated teams competed in national tournaments. We analyzed the difficulty in anticipating offensive movements for the opponent defensive team, quantified as entropy, using tracking position data. This was compared with female players recorded in a previous study. They affiliated with a university team ranked in the third division of the regional league (Average experience 11.33 years, [Formula: see text] = 3.42). There was no such achievement as those in the high expertise condition. Using a linear mixed model with the significance level ([Formula: see text]), the results showed that the entropy for the key player in the high expertise condition was significantly higher than that in the low expertise after the tips condition, and similar to that in the low expertise before the tips condition. The tips were concise coaching advice regarding coordination related to the crucial role of intervention decision and adjustment. This was also lower than that simulated in the random walk condition, which served as a minimal baseline for scientifically explaining the observed complexity. Our first step study suggests that the movement dynamics at the expert level may be relatively complex, making it difficult for the defensive team to anticipate, and related to the application of team strategies.
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.