See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/49842345

Manipulating informational constraints shapes movement reorganization in

interceptive actions

Article in Attention Perception & Psychophysics · February 2011

DOI: 10.3758/s13414-011-0102-1 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

103 437

4 authors, including:

Ross Pinder Keith Davids

Paralympics Australia Sheffield Hallam University
51 PUBLICATIONS 1,893 CITATIONS 714 PUBLICATIONS 35,470 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Duarte Araujo
University of Lisbon
370 PUBLICATIONS 19,462 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Duarte Araujo on 01 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254
DOI 10.3758/s13414-011-0102-1

Manipulating informational constraints shapes movement

reorganization in interceptive actions
Ross A. Pinder & Keith Davids & Ian Renshaw &
Duarte Araújo

Published online: 15 February 2011

# Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2011

Abstract Movement organization of cricket batters’ Interceptive actions have been used as highly effective task
actions was analyzed under three distinct experimental task vehicles for developing theoretical understanding of the
constraints: a representative condition of a practice context synergetic relationship of information and movement under
in which the batters batted against a “live” bowler, a ball severe time constraints (e.g., Caljouw, van der Kamp, &
projection machine, and a near life-size video simulation of Savelsbergh, 2004; Le Runigo, Benguigui, & Bardy, 2005;
a bowler. Results showed that each distinct set of task Montagne, Laurent, Durey, & Bootsma, 1999). Temporal
constraints led to significant variations in the patterns of demands in fast ball sports often exceed the intrinsic
movement control. Removal of advanced information limitations in visuomotor delays and movement times
sources from a bowler’s actions when the batters faced (van der Kamp, Rivas, van Doorn, & Savelsbergh, 2008),
the ball projection machine caused significant delays in as exemplified by the margin for error in the interceptive
movement initiation, resulting in reduced peak bat swing timing of a cricket batting stroke, reported to be in the
velocities and a reduction in the quality of bat–ball contact, region of 2.5 ms (Regan, 1997). To cope with such task
when compared with batting against a “live” bowler. When constraints, skilled performers are able to use perceptual
responding to a two-dimensional video simulation, batters information to produce extremely high levels of precision.
were able to use information from the bowlers’ action, Consequently, there has been a significant increase in
enabling fidelity of initial behavioral responses consistent research examining perceptual–motor skill in fast ball
with the task of batting against a “live” bowler. However, sports—particularly, in assessing visual anticipation. In this
without interceptive task requirements or actual ball flight respect, performers consistently show an ability to use
information, significant variations in downswing initiation advanced kinematic information from the actions of
timing and peak bat velocities were demonstrated. Findings opponents (e.g., Abernethy & Zawi, 2007; Jackson &
stress the need for representative experimental and learning Morgan, 2007; Müller & Abernethy, 2006; Renshaw &
designs in fast ball sports for developing performers. Fairweather, 2000) and early ball flight information (e.g.,
Land & McLeod, 2000; Müller et al., 2009) to guide their
Keywords Movement organization . Interceptive actions . actions.
Representative design . Task constraints . Fast ball sports However, a major concern of typical studies of percep-
tual–motor expertise has been the neglect of the role of the
environment, which is in alignment with similar limitations
R. A. Pinder (*) : K. Davids : I. Renshaw in psychological science (see Brunswik, 1956; Davids,
School of Human Movement Studies,
2008; Davids, Button, Araújo, Renshaw, & Hristovski,
Queensland University of Technology,
Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, 2006; Dhami, Hertwig, & Hoffrage, 2004; Dunwoody,
QLD 4059, Brisbane, Australia 2006; Hammond & Stewart, 2001). This concern was
e-mail: [email protected] epitomized by Egon Brunswik over half a century ago
when outlining the concept of representative design and
D. Araújo
Faculty of Human Kinetics, Technical University of Lisbon, emphasizing the importance of organism–environment
Lisbon, Portugal relations in the study of human behavior. On the whole,
Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254 1243

Brunswikian concepts still have not been integrated into that in order to attain representative experimental design,
psychological research (Rogers, 2008), with researchers experimental tasks need to allow participants opportunities
traditionally opting for systematic designs for experimen- to pickup and use specifying information from the
tal control, jeopardizing the generalizability of research environment to support functional movement responses (i.e.,
findings (Araújo, Davids, & Passos, 2007). Generalizabil- perception–action coupling; for an overview, see Warren,
ity is central to the ideals of Brunswik’s notion of represen- 2006).
tative experimental design, which proposes that experimental In spite of the widely stressed importance of perceptual
stimuli must be sampled from an organism’s natural skills in fast ball sports (Abernethy, Zawi, & Jackson, 2008;
environment so as to be representative of the stimuli to Shim, Carlton, & Kwon, 2006; Weissensteiner, Abernethy,
which it is adapted and to which experimental data are Farrow, & Müller, 2008; Williams & McRobert, 2008),
intended to be generalized (Brunswik, 1956). Brunswikian much research has analyzed performers’ responses in typical
concepts are harmonious with the tenets of Gibson’s (1979) performance environments, using ball projection machines to
theory of direct perception, which emphasized the reciprocal enhance experimental control of projectile trajectories. For
relations between processes of perception and action in example, in studies of cricket batting, ball projection
organism–environment interactions. In studies of sport, machines have been used in experiments to assess gaze
representative design supports the need for the generalization behaviors (Croft, Button, & Dicks, 2010; Land & McLeod,
of task constraints in experiments to the task constraints 2000), visual function (Mann, Ho, De Souza, Watson, &
encountered during different performance contexts—for Taylor, 2007), and movement organization (primarily tempo-
example, perceiving the actions of a “live” opponent in a ral responses between skill levels; Weissensteiner, Abernethy,
study of anticipation (Araújo, Davids, & Hristovski, 2006; & Farrow, 2009). However, the use of ball projection
Davids, 2008). machines (with velocities ranging from 26 to 30 m∙s-1) has
Previous research on perceptual–motor skill in sport has revealed significant differences in the spatiotemporal
been criticized for failing to maintain the functional responses of performers (skilled and experienced to less-
coupling of perception and action processes in experimental skilled and developmental juniors), when compared with
designs (e.g., Dicks, Davids, & Araújo, 2008; van der facing a “live” bowler projecting a ball at the same speed
Kamp et al., 2008). Some studies of perception and action (Gibson & Adams, 1989; Pinder, Renshaw, & Davids, 2009;
have demonstrated significant differences in visuomotor Renshaw, Oldham, Davids, & Golds, 2007). These findings
behaviors observed between laboratory conditions and task are consistent with the data observed in the use of such
conditions representative of performance contexts (e.g., machines in other sports (e.g., tennis; Shim, Carlton, Chow,
video simulation vs. in situ tasks; see Dicks, Button, & & Chae, 2005).
Davids, 2010; Mann, Williams, Ward, & Janelle, 2007). Therefore, the current understanding of perceptual–
Specifically, the limitations of the ubiquitous occlusion and motor expertise in sport (in both visual perception and
video simulation methodologies have been attributed to the technique analysis) may have been compromised through
removal of key sources of information in experimental use of experimental designs that are not representative of
design and a failure to ensure that neuroscientific knowl- performance contexts (i.e., facing a “live” bowler). Not
edge of visual system functioning underpins research only is this a critical concern for perceptual–motor research,
designs (e.g., Davids, 2008; van der Kamp et al., 2008). but it also has major consequences for learning and practice
Traditionally,experimental designs have not ensured that design in fast ball sports, where the use of ball machines is
selected task constraints support the use of functional ubiquitous, particularly in skill development programs for
information–movement couplings. That is, environmental junior performers. During learning, performers attempt to
information presented in experimental tasks and the action converge on useful perceptual variables to support action in
responses required (e.g., verbal, written, or simplified specific performance environments (e.g., perceptual attune-
movements) do not allow performers to replicate the same ment; Fajen, Riley, & Turvey, 2009; Gibson, 1966; Jacobs &
perception and action processes as those displayed in Michaels, 2002). Intuitively, the removal of critical
representative performance environments. Research has perceptual information sources (particularly during early
typically been focused on substantiating expertise effects, learning or important developmental stages) may limit the
rather than on comparing participant movement behaviors development of performers’ ability to detect reliable
across varying task constraints. As a result, research needs information to support action (e.g., the creation of infor-
to develop a principled theoretical rationale for this line of mation–movement couplings and their refinement over
work to provide a comprehensive framework to guide time; Araújo, 2007; Davids, Renshaw, & Glazier, 2005;
future experimentation on perceptual–motor performance in Jacobs & Michaels, 2002). Changing the informational
sport (Pinder, Davids, Renshaw, & Araújo, in press). The constraints on action might result in less representative
integration of Brunswikian and Gibsonian ideas proposes practice designs and changes to a performer’s acquisition of
1244 Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254

functional movement control. This idea has been exempli- response can be assessed by measuring task performance in
fied in cricket batting research, where Stretch, Buys, Du, detail (Araújo et al., 2007; Stoffregen, Bardy, Smart, &
Toit, and Viljoen (1998) demonstrated that batters adapted Pagulayan, 2003; see also van der Kamp et al., 2008).
spatiotemporal characteristics of emergent action when Therefore, the aims of the present study were to compare
facing a “live” opponent, depending on the required shot spatiotemporal movement organization, bat velocity, and
response to different bowling trajectories, through the interceptive ability (quality of bat–ball contact between
pickup of advanced kinematic information and early ball interceptive conditions; see Müller & Abernethy, 2008) of
flight. These adaptations to action ensured that batters cricket batters across three distinct tasks typically used in
contacted the ball at the right time with the correct spatial experimental and learning design. For this purpose, the
orientation (Savelsbergh & Bootsma, 1994). As a result, movement organization of cricket batters’ actions when
when facing a “live” bowler, experienced batters executed performing an attacking and a defensive shot was compared
attacking drives that reached peak horizontal velocity 0.02 s under three distinct experimental task constraints against
before bat–ball contact (Stretch et al., 1998), consistent (1) a “live” bowler, (2) a ball projection machine, and (3) a
with findings in other fast ball sports (e.g., baseball, near life-size, 2-D video simulation of the same bowler
McIntyre & Pfautsch, 1982; softball, Messier & Owen, delivering a ball. It was predicted that spatiotemporal
1984; golf, Shibayama & Ebashi, 1983). Despite these responses when batting against a “live” bowler would
findings, very little work has focused on how differing differ markedly with performance in both the ball projec-
spatiotemporal responses under varying task constraints tion machine and video simulation constraints, with these
affect batting performance outcomes or bat velocity (force conditions varying the degree to which the movement
control), beyond simple performance measures (see, e.g., responses and available information are representative of
Mann, Abernethy, & Farrow, 2010). Clearly, further work is the performance environment. It was also predicted that bat
needed to compare perceptual–motor organization when velocity would differ significantly under video simulation
batters bat against a “live” performer and against ball conditions, with lower peak velocities observed with the
projection machines, to observe how advance kinematic removal of the interceptive task requirement and ball flight
information from a bowler’s actions shapes behavior. information, which has been shown to change prospective
In one exception, Taliep, Galal, and Vaughan (2007) movement control (Montagne, 2005; Müller et al., 2009).
compared the kinematic variables of performance by skilled Furthermore, analyses of attacking and defensive shots
and less-skilled cricket batters when completing “shadow” were expected to reveal further insights into the process of
front foot drives (an attacking shot) against “realistic coupling of movement to information in a dynamic
projected video footage” in a screened simulation of the interceptive action. These analyses were expected to
performance environment. However, since no comparative demonstrate possible consequences for movement organi-
studies of movement behavior under video simulation zation of employing ball projection machines in research
conditions and a representative task of batting against a and learning designs, which remove advance kinematic (i.e.,
“live” opponent currently exist, it is not understood whether preball release) information from the bowler’s actions (see, e.g.,
life-size video simulations provide a representative task for Weissensteiner et al., 2009).
batters. This lack of clarity is due mainly to the removal of
the interceptive action in many simulation designs (e.g.,
decoupling of perception and action) and to previous Method
research showing differences in information pickup from
2-D video displays, as compared with natural performance Participants
environments (see Dicks et al., 2010). Furthermore, without
knowledge of the manipulation of ball length in previous Twelve cricket batters (age: 15.6 ± 0.7 years) with 6.6 ±
studies (varying perceptual information and ball trajectories), 0.6 years of competitive junior cricket experience were
it is unknown whether batters can attune to small but critical recruited for the study. All the participants provided informed
changes in delivery characteristics (e.g., between two different consent, and ethical clearance was completed through a
ball landing positions) when that information is presented in university ethics committee. Four left-arm bowlers (age =
video simulations. Critical information may be removed 15.0 ± 0.8 years) with similar conventional bowling actions
completely (e.g., removal of a bowler’s movements when (ACB, 1998) and physical attributes (average height of
ball projection machines are used), but it may also be present release = 2.06 ± 0.07 m; average bowling speed = 28.14 ±
but much harder to detect in a 2-D display than in the natural 0.56 m∙s-1) were also recruited for the study. All the bowlers
performance environment. were appropriately matched to the batters’ performance level
To assess the degree of association between behavior and experience. Bowling speed was assessed for the four
under different task constraints, the fidelity of the action bowlers using a sports radar gun (Stalker Radar, Texas).
Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254 1245

Procedure of ball trajectory characteristics (Gibson & Adams, 1989;

Renshaw et al., 2007).
Performance observations occurred in the participants’ Participants were instructed under all conditions to
regular indoor practice facility. Participants undertook three perform as they would in a match situation, by attempting
distinct experimental tasks: batting against (1) a “live” to score as many runs as they could while avoiding being
bowler, (2) a ball machine, and (3) a video simulation, in a bowled. No further instruction or knowledge of the
fully counterbalanced design to control for order and experimental aims was provided. In the video simulation
learning effects. None of the 12 participants had previously conditions, participants were asked to replicate the shot
faced any of the four bowlers but had faced bowlers of they would play against a “real ball” in each situation,
similar speed and ability in training. All the participants had producing coupled responses to the video footage.
some limited experience of batting against a ball machine Participants generally faced 36–40 deliveries in each of
(<30 trials per week during years of competitive experi- the interceptive conditions (ball machine and bowler) to
ence); however, none had any experience of video-based generate the required number of shots for data analysis, in
simulation training. Two weeks prior to data collection, all line with previous empirical research (Stretch et al., 1998).
the participants completed six blocks of 6 trials (6 cricket Participants faced 36 randomized trials under video screen
“overs,” resulting in 36 trials) of “simulated batting” conditions. Two common strokes in cricket (the forward
against the video-based simulation, which allowed partic- defensive stroke and the front foot straight drive) that have
ipants to become familiarized with the equipment and trial been the focus of previous research (Stretch et al., 1998)
procedures. These trials were completed against footage of were used to assess movement timing and control of action
different bowlers with abilities similar to those used in the across the distinct experimental tasks. These strokes are
data collection phase of the study, to ensure that findings widely considered as basic performance foundations, with
were not influenced by any possible learning effects caused experiential knowledge and empirical research suggesting
by exposure to the specific bowlers’ movements. that with modifications, the forward defensive shot pro-
The same balls (“Oz” bowling machine ball) were used vides the basis for the attacking straight drive (Stretch et al.,
across all conditions (including filming of the video 1998; Woolmer, Noakes, & Moffett, 2008). Importantly, the
simulation video trials) to provide consistency of bounce two shots require the batter to discriminate ball delivery
to participants. The ball machine (Jugs Inc., Tualatin, characteristics (i.e., pickup of trajectory information to
Oregon) was set to the mean height of release and bowling determine the pitching location) between a ball that
speed recorded from the four bowlers in order to replicate bounces closer to the batter (2–3 m from the batter’s
their typical delivery characteristics (e.g., bowling trajecto- preparatory position; see Fig. 1) and affords an attacking
ry). The same highly experienced Australian level 3 coach drive and a ball that pitches farther from the batter (4–5 m),
operated the ball machine for all the participants, using a requiring a defensive response.
typical standardized predelivery routine, in which the
operator held the ball up for the batter to see before Video preparation and screen setup
lowering it directly into the ball machine (see Renshaw et
al., 2007; Shim et al., 2005). The time between release from Required video simulation footage of the four bowlers was
the operator’s hand and the ball’s emerging from the filmed (Sony HVR-V1P) from the batters’ preparatory
machine head (approximately 1 s) was consistent for all position at the batting crease in the same indoor facility as
release trajectories. The sound produced by the ball that in the “live” bowler and ball machine conditions. A
machine also provided information that the batters could marking grid on the floor (0.4 × 1 m areas; see Fig. 1), in
use to predict when the ball would be released (Shim et al., line with the batting stumps, enabled the ball-pitching
2005). location (direction and distance from the batting stumps) to
Deliveries were randomized across all conditions. Both be recorded for each video trial. Trials were randomized in
front and back foot shots were included to alleviate any bias a test package (with an equal number of deliveries from
in batters’ responses and to ensure that the experimental each bowler), requiring the participant to respond with a
setup did not direct perceptual choices (i.e., limit batters’ range of both front and back foot movements, with no prior
choices to just the two shots of interest). Bowlers followed knowledge of upcoming deliveries. Knowledge of the
a randomized script for ball target locations, which was bounce point for each trial allowed for consistency across
replicated in the ball machine condition. Importantly, the all three conditions. Video simulation footage was projected
ball machine allowed for subtle but critical changes in onto a large screen (2.6 × 3.5 m) situated 3 m from the
delivery trajectory, prior to the appearance of the ball, that popping crease (position of participants’ preparatory
were undetectable by these participants, alleviating the stance), allowing an approximate subtended visual angle
concern that a ball machine provides too much predictability of 7° and a virtual distance of 17.7 m. This setup provided a
1246 Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254

Fig. 1 Experimental setup for

Video screen
“live” bowler, ball machine,
and video simulation conditions, Bowler/
Batter
respectively Ball Machine
Stumps
Marking grid

3m
17.7m (distance between creases)

20.12m (pitch length)

near life-size image of the bowler at the moment of bat–ball contact when the batter faced the video screen was
ball release, in accordance with methods in both cricket determined by three high-level cricket coaches (English
(Taliep et al., 2007) and soccer (Dicks et al., 2010) Cricket Board levels 2 and 3), in accordance with previous
goalkeeping research. work (Taliep et al., 2007). Coaches viewed synchronized
video of the presented video trial and the batter’s responses
Data collection and predicted the point at which bat–ball contact would
have occurred. Coaches’ predictions were highly consistent
Two synchronized cameras (Sony HVR-V1P) were used to with each other (within 0.03 s) and in line with previous
simultaneously capture participant movements (located findings (Taliep et al., 2007). The average frame number
10 m from the sagittal plane of action perpendicular to the provided by the three coaches’ assessments was taken as
batting crease) and the point of ball release, following the point of predicted bat–ball contact. Two-way (experi-
established setup procedures (Bartlett, 2007). Cameras were mental task × shot) repeatedmeasures analyses of variance
set at a frame rate of 100 Hz and a shutter speed of 1/300 s. (ANOVAs) confirmed that there were no significant differ-
Calibration was attained using horizontal and vertical ences across conditions, F(2, 142) = 0.09, p > .05, or shot
references of known distance. Participants wore full type, F(1, 71) = 0.02, p > .05, in the timing between release
protective equipment (including batting helmets) in all and bat–ball contact (“live” bowler or ball machine) or
conditions, and contrasting markers were placed on the top predicted contact (video simulation).
and bottom edges of the bat and the proximal phalanx of
the first and fifth toes (for front and back feet, respectively). Dependent measures
These markers allowed analysis of step lengths and bat
swing characteristics, including peak bat swing height and Quality of bat–ball contact
linear horizontal bat velocity. Pilot work and previous
empirical research (Renshaw et al., 2007; Stretch et al., A measure of quality of bat–ball contact (QOC), validated
1998) have demonstrated that the measured aspects are by Müller and Abernethy (2008), was used as a simple but
suitably planar to allow for this type of analysis. Key reliable tool for assessing interceptive success under both
phases (dependent variables) of the batting action were “live” bowler and ball machine task constraints. A trained
identified as (1) point of ball release, (2) initiation of observer provided a QOC score for each trial in line with
backswing of the bat, (3) initiation of the front foot the validated measure. The scores where defined as (1)
movement, (4) initiation of the downswing of the bat, (5) the ball contacting the bat and traveling in a direction
placement (planting) of the front foot, and (6) point of bat– consistent with the precontact plane of bat motion/ swing
ball contact (see Renshaw et al., 2007; Stretch et al., 1998). (2 points), (2) the ball contacting the bat but deflecting in
Moment of ball release was recorded as the first frame after a direction inconsistent with the precontact plane of bat
the ball had left either the bowler’s hand (in “live” and motion/swing (1 point), and (3) the ball not making contact
video conditions) or the mouth of the ball projection with the bat (0 points). Reliability was assessed on a
machine. Front foot movement initiations and placements selection of 42 trials (10%). Intrarater reliability was
were defined as the first frame after the foot had lifted off assessed by comparing two video reviews (with a 4-week
and been placed on the ground, respectively. Initiations of break) of the first observer, while inter-rater reliability was
backswing and downswing were identified within the data assessed by comparing the scores of the first observer with
on the basis of acceleration patterns of the bat endpoint and those of a second observer. Strong correlations were found
were confirmed using frame-by-frame analysis (due to for both intra- (rs = .87) and inter-rater (rs = .86) reliability,
preparatory movements). Timing of the predicted point of consistent with previous work (Mann et al., 2010).
Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254 1247

Temporal phasing eta-squared (ηp2) values were provided for each ANOVA to
provide an indication of the effect size for each factor or
For each condition, means and standard deviations of interaction of factors.
movement timing data (in seconds) were recorded for each
of the key initiation points, relative to ball release. Unless
stated, data were calculated in seconds (mean ± standard Results
deviation) before bat–ball contact (or predicted contact), with
point of ball release occurring 0.64 s before bat–ball contact. Quality of bat-ball contact

Bat velocity, peak bat swing height, and step length The ANOVA for QOC scores (“live” bowler vs. ball machine;
see Fig. 2) revealed main effects for both experimental task,
Trials were analyzed using SIMI motion software (SIMI F(1, 71) = 31.76. p < .01, ηp2 = .31, and shot type F(1, 71) =
Reality Motion Systems GmbH). Data were smoothed using 14.99, p < .01, ηp2 = .17, with significantly higher scores
a 4th-order Butterworth recursive filter with a cutoff frequency under “live” bowler task constraints (p < .01) and when the
of 4.5 Hz. Coordinates of the digitizing process were used to batter responded with a forward drive (p < .05).
calculate linear horizontal velocity of the bat throughout the
action, peak height of the bat swing, and step length at bat–ball Front foot movement
(or predicted) contact. Bat swing height was recorded as the
peak height attained throughout the batter’s action, and step Front foot movement characteristics were significantly shaped
length was measured between foot markers at the moment of by experimental task constraints (comparison of all three
bat–ball (or predicted) contact. Digitizer accuracy was conditions; see Figs. 3 and 4). There was a main effect
assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient for both for experimental task on the timing of front foot initiation,
intra- (ICC = .96) and interrater (ICC = .94) reliability F(2, 142) = 67.92, p < .01, ηp2 = .49, primarily due to a
measures, considered to demonstrate high-to-excellent reli- significant delay when under ball machine constraints,
ability within the relevant literature (Atkinson & Nevill, 1998; for both drive (p < .01) and defense (p < .01) shots. Similarly,
see also Vincent, 1994). main effects for both experimental task constraints,
F(2, 142) = 26.13, p < .01, ηp2 = .27, and shot type,
Data analysis F(1, 71) = 7.75, p < .01, ηp2 = .10, were found for the timing
of front foot placement, with later (i.e., closer to bat–ball
Video trials used for analysis were initially evaluated to contact) placements occurring under ball machine task
ensure consistency of responses and delivery characteristics
(ball bounce location) across all three conditions. In line 2.0

with similar work (Shim et al., 2005), trials demonstrated 1.8

*
that participants did not preempt the ball machine delivery, Δ
1.6 *
nor did they make early movements forward or backward +
and have to correct their original decision. Six forward 1.4
Quality of contact

defensive and six forward drive shots were analyzed for 1.2
Δ
each participant in each condition, resulting in a total of 422
trials (12 participants × 3 experimental tasks × 2 shot 1.0

responses × 6 trials). Separate two-way (experimental 0.8

task × shot) within-subjects ANOVAs with repeatedmeas-
0.6
ures on both factors were used to analyze the data on all
dependent measures. In cases of violation of the sphericity 0.4 Bowler
assumption, a Greenhouse–Geisser correction was used to 0.2 Ball Machine
adjust the degrees of freedom for treatment and error terms
of the repeated measures variables in the ANOVAs. 0.0

Following these analyses, post-hoc pairwise comparisons Drive Defence

were undertaken to assess which comparisons were Fig. 2 Mean group batting quality of contact scores across inter-
statistically significant in each instance. Paired ttests were ceptive experimental task constraints (bowler and ball machine) and
used to assess differences across experimental task for both shot type. Data are represented with standard errors. *Significant
differences between experimental task constraints (p < .01).
shot types. Bonferroni adjustments were used in all cases to +
Significant differences in scores collapsed across experimental
control for type I error (Field, 2009) resulting from any condition for shot type (p < .05). ΔExperimental task-specific
interdependence within dependent measures. Finally, partial differences for drive and defensive shots (p < .05)
1248 Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254

Fig. 3 Differences in the timing 0.60 +

and initiation of front foot

bat-ball contact (s)

movement (FFM) and front foot 0.50
placement (FFP) relative to **
bat–ball contact, when three **
0.40
distinct experimental tasks were
faced. *Significant differences 0.30

before bat
between experimental task
constraints (p < .05). **Signifi- 0.20

Time befo
cant differences between Bowler
experimental task constraints 0.10 Ball Machine
* *
(p < .01). +Significant differences Video Screen
in scores collapsed across 0.00
experimental condition for shot FFM FFP FFM FFP
type (p < .01) Drive Defence

constraints (p < .05) and when a forward drive was performed were also differences in the timing of downswing initiation
(p < .01). between the “live” bowler and video simulation constraints,
There were significant main effects for both experimen- with initiation occurring significantly earlier when a video
tal task constraints, F(2, 142) = 7.35, p < .01, ηp2 = .09, and screen was faced (p < .01). Additionally, the downswing was
shot type, F(1, 71) = 182.69, p < .01, ηp2 = .72, for batters’ initiated significantly later (see Fig. 3) under all three
front foot step lengths (see Fig. 5), which were shorter experimental task constraints when an attacking shot was
under ball machine task constraints (p < .01) and when used (0.18 ± 0.05 s) as compared with a defensive shot
forward defensive shots were performed (p < .01). (0.22 ± 0.06 s).
There were significant main effects for both experimental
Bat swing task constraints, F(2, 130) = 14.78, p < .01, ηp2 = .19, and
shot type, F(1, 65) = 138.95, p < .01, ηp2 = .68, on peak
A significant main effect revealed that backswing backswing height attained by participants (see Fig. 5). Post
initiation time was affected by experimental task con- hoc analysis revealed that significantly shorter backswing
straints, F(2, 130) = 67.33, p < .01, ηp2 = .51, primarily heights were attained when a ball machine was faced than in
due to backswing initiation’s occurring significantly later the “live” bowler (p < .01) or video simulation (p < .01)
against the ball projection machine, as compared with both tasks. Analysis also revealed a significant difference between
the “live” bowler and the video simulation conditions (see shot type and peak backswing height, with batters demon-
Fig. 4; p < .01). Similarly, main effects for both experimental strating higher peak backswings when using an attacking
task, F(2, 142) = 26.26, p < .01, ηp2 = .27, and shot type, shot (p < .01).
F(1, 71) = 80.54, p < .01, ηp2 = .53, demonstrated that
experimental task design influenced the timing of the Bat speed
downswing initiation. There were significant differences in
timing of downswing initiation when the batters faced the Table 1 summarizes the mean group data for the peak
ball machine, as compared with both the live bowler horizontal velocity attained during the batter’s action and the
(p < .01), and video simulation (p < .05) task constraints. time during the downswing at which the peak velocity
In contrast with observations on backswing initiation, there occurred, relative to bat–ball (or predicted) contact. There

Fig. 4 Differences in the timing +

0.70
and initiation of backswing (BS)
bat-ball contact (s)

and downswing (DS) relative to 0.60

bat–ball contact, when three dis- ** **
tinct experimental tasks were 0.50
faced. *Significant differences be- 0.40
tween experimental task con-
Time before bat

straints (p < .05). **Significant 0.30

differences between experimental *
0.20 * * **
task constraints (p < .01). * ** Bowler
+
Significant differences in scores 0.10 Ball Machine
collapsed across experimental Video Screen
condition for shot type (p < .01) 0.00
BS DS BS DS
Drive Defence
Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254 1249

Fig. 5 Mean group differences + +

in peak backswing heights
(above left) and step lengths 1.70 1.10

Peak height of the backswing (m)

(above right) during an attacking 1.60
and a defensive shot under three 1.50
1.00
distinct experimental task con- *

Step Length (m)

1.40 0.90
straints (error bars represent
* *
standard deviations). *Signifi- 1.30
0.80
cant differences between exper- 1.20
imental task constraints *
1.10 0.70
(p < .01). +Significant differ-
1.00
ences in scores collapsed 0.60
across experimental condition 0.90
for shot type (p < .01) 0.80 0.50
Drive Defence Drive Defence

Bowler Video Screen Ball Machine

were significant main effects for peak horizontal velocity of Discussion

the bat endpoint for experimental task constraints, F(2, 142) =
37.18, p < .01, ηp2 = .34, and shot type, F(1, 71) = 870.46, The design of experimental task constraints that effectively
p < .01, ηp2 = .93. Batters achieved higher peak bat velocities capture organism–environment relationships remains a
when batting against a “live” bowler than in both ball prominent concern in experimental psychology (Brunswik,
machine and video screen conditions (p < .01). There was 1956; Dhami et al., 2004; Dunwoody, 2006; Rogers, 2008).
also a significant interaction between experimental task This study provided evidence to support current concerns
constraints and shot type, F(2, 142) = 13.39, p < .01, ηp2 = expressed by perceptual–motor behavior researchers over
.16, predominantly due to the significant decrease in mean the generality of performance data from experimental and
peak horizontal velocity for the forward defensive shot under learning tasks to performance contexts, such as sport (cf.
video simulation conditions (p < .01). Furthermore, significant Dicks et al., 2010; van der Kamp et al., 2008). Data
main effects were found for the timing of peak velocity across revealed significant changes in timing and organization of
both experimental task constraints, F(2, 142) = 33.41, p < .01, junior cricket batters’ movements under different task
ηp2 = .66, and shot type, F(1, 71) = 136.09, p < .01, ηp2 = .32. constraints. These findings have major implications for
Significant differences in timing of peak bat swing were found learning design at these important developmental stages of
between batting under video simulation conditions for both learning in ball sports such as cricket, particularly due to
the drive and defense, when compared with both “live” the heavy use of ball projection machines in many training
bowler (p < .01) and ball machine (p < .01) tasks. Results programs.
displayed a significant interaction between experimental task
constraints and shot type, F(2, 142) = 7.91, p < .05, ηp2 = .10. “Live” bowler–ball projection machine comparisons
Fig. 6 displays the grouped mean horizontal bat velocity for
the forward drive. Note that the time at which peak velocity The most pronounced differences observed in the data
occurred relative to bat–ball (or predicted) contact indicates demonstrated that even simple performance measures, such
not only the different peaks across the experimental tasks, but as QOC and bat swing velocities, are significantly affected
also a dissimilar curve shape for the bat endpoint velocity in by the removal of key sources of perceptual information.
the video simulation task due to the removal of the bat–ball Batters demonstrated definitive movement initiation effects
contact. (backswing and front foot) shortly after ball release when

Table 1 Peak horizontal bat

endpoint velocity (m·s-1), and Peak Bat Velocity Timing of Peak Velocity
time (in seconds) at which peak
velocity occurred relative to Drive Defense Drive Defense
bat–ball or predicted bat–ball
point of contact, for forward M SD M SD M SD M SD
drive and forward defensive
shots Bowler 11.38 1.75 7.37 1.45 -0.01 0.02 -0.03 0.02
Ball projection machine 10.62 1.89 7.32 1.37 -0.02 0.02 -0.03 0.01
Video screen 10.31 1.82 5.25 1.71 0.01 0.02 -0.02 0.03
1250 Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254

Fig. 6 Mean group horizontal 12

Group mean horizontal bat end-point

bat endpoint velocities for the
forward drive shot across three
10
distinct experimental tasks. (N.
B. Data peaks do not align with

velocity (m.s-1)
analyzed data in Table 1, due 8
to peak horizontal velocities’
occurring at differing times 6
Bowler
across all trials)
Ball Machine
Video Screen 4

0
-0.8 -0.7 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2
-2
Time (s)

facing a “live” bowler. These data provided evidence for success. However, batters demonstrated significantly lower
the use of advance sources of information to organize performance scores (QOC; see Fig. 2) and lower peak bat
movement patterns, available from the kinematics of the swing velocities (10.62 vs. 11.38 m∙s-1) when compared
bowlers’ actions (see Shim et al., 2005; Shim et al., 2006). with batting against a “live” bowler. Batters attained peak
This observation was particularly evident when one con- bat velocities just before the point of bat–ball contact
siders that the batters needed to complete one of two (-0.02 s) under both interceptive task conditions (Stretch et
fundamentally different tasks:—that is, making a definitive al., 1998), demonstrating the use of prospective information
movement forward (for the drive or the defense) or from ball flight characteristics for the timing of intercep-
backward (against shorter pitching trials). Due to subtle tion. Prospective information is information about the
changes of the ball projection machine head between trials current future; that is, the performer is informed about
(allowing us to randomize angle of delivery and, therefore, the future outcomes if the current state is maintained
pitching length), the batters in this study were unaware of (Montagne, Bastin & Jacobs, 2008). Hence, it provides
upcoming delivery characteristics in advance, a concern information for the modification of movement, allowing
with previous research involving ball projection machines performers to adapt behavior independently of specific task
(Gibson & Adams, 1989; Renshaw et al., 2007). The use of constraints. However, critical delays in movement timing
perceptual information from the bowler’s actions allowed imposed by the task constraints (through removal of key
batters to significantly increase peak bat swing heights and perceptual information) could not be offset by the batters’
step lengths (see Fig. 5), similar to findings from previous prospectively controlling spatiotemporal characteristics of
research in which tennis players were observed to use the action on the basis of ball flight information alone.
advance information sources from an opponent’s actions to Interestingly, the strong within-task relationships between
increase their court movement coverage by up to 1.2 m time of downswing initiation and point of bat–ball contact
(Shim et al., 2005). Importantly, the finding that batters suggested that the changes in timing of downswing
displayed lower backswing heights and shorter step lengths initiation were caused by differences in the information
when completing a forward defense, as compared with the available between tasks. For example, the batters produced
forward drive, supports previous work (Stretch et al., 1998). equally consistent timings for downswing initiations in the
This observation confirms that the batters were able to ball projection machine condition, but these occurred
decide on the required stroke before the downswing began, significantly later (closer to point of bat–ball contact) than
on the basis of advance kinematic and early ball flight initiations against a “live” bowler.
information. Comparatively, similar variations in movement The added temporal constraint imposed by the ball
responses were observed when they batted against a ball machine task constraints in this study raises concerns over
projection machine, even with the removal of prerelease experimental and learning task designs that exclude
information sources from the bowler, albeit occurring anticipatory perceptual sources. It appears that much of
significantly later. Significant delays in backswing and the current data on perceptual anticipation (e.g., gaze
front foot movement initiation times of 80 and 100 ms, behaviors or movement-based skill differences) is based
respectively, required batters to functionally adapt their on experimental designs that are not representative of
actions (implement lower peak bat swing heights and human performance contexts such as sport. It is possible
shorter step lengths; see Fig. 5) to ensure a degree of task that current data on technical and perceptual characteristics
Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254 1251

(e.g., visual search) differences across skill levels in cricket Wood, & Parks, 1999; Rowe & McKenna, 2001; Williams,
batting (e.g., Land & McLeod, 2000; Weissensteiner et al., Ward, & Chapman, 2003). Our data suggest that video
2009) may be confounded by the amount of task-specific simulations may indeed provide representative performance
practice that participants have been exposed to against ball tasks for assessing (or training) affordance perception in
projection machines in developmental programs (e.g., U15 developing athletes. However, it remains unclear whether
to adult-level programs). In these programs, some batters this method could result in the same affordance perception
may have been essentially learning a task different from (attunement to subtle but critical changes in response
that required in actual performance environments. requirements) or efficient and accurate action production
without the requirement for simulated movement perfor-
“Live” bowler–video simulation comparisons mance by participants (see van der Kamp et al., 2008). An
important finding from this experiment is that, when
Our results showed that batters were able to achieve the perception for action is available (under video simulation
same temporal advantage against a “live” bowler and in constraints), it enables a higher fidelity of the initial
video simulation conditions, demonstrating comparable simulated action responses than when an interceptive action
movement organization for the critical early movement is performed without the availability of representative
initiations (i.e., preparatory actions of backswing and front perceptual variables (under ball machine conditions). These
foot movement). Backswing and front foot movement data provide a demonstration of the theoretical role of
initiation points occurred ~60 and 130 ms after ball release, affordances in guiding skilled actions and are a relevant
respectively, under both task constraints. This performance indication for the strategy of manipulating key task
characteristic supported equivalent peak bat swing heights constraints in training sessions. Further work is needed to
and step lengths across shot types (see Fig. 5). Batters were understand how the pickup of affordances for action may
able to pick up and use pre-ball release information and be incorporated into learning designs in developmental
information from the first portion of ball flight, from a sport programs.
“live” bowler and when it was presented in a video The most pronounced differences in our batting data
simulation. provided clear evidence for concerns over generalizing
These findings might be considered in light of advances observations between experimental tasks that lack fidelity
in behavioral neuroscience (visual system functioning). of performance characteristics. Changes in the initiation of
Requiring batters to couple movements to video-simulated the downswing and peak bat swing velocities demonstrated
information on a screen enabled comparison with informa- a prospective control strategy, with batters’ comparing the
tion provided by a “live” bowler. This methodological perceived current state of the environment (e.g., time to
advance helped address concerns over speed/accuracy contact) with the requirements for successful interception
trade-offs (e.g., requiring participants to “react as quickly (Fajen et al., 2009; Montagne, 2005). The a priori concern
as possible” in tests of perceptual skill), which seem to have that 2-D simulation displays do not provide sufficient
confounded previous studies in visual anticipation (see van information on ball flight characteristics to support actions
der Kamp et al., 2008). Data from our study demonstrated such as interceptions was vindicated by observations of
that junior batters’ perceptions, decision making, and initial significant differences in timing of downswing initiation
movement responses in this specific video simulation task and markedly lower peak bat swing velocities compared to
were representative of similar processes observed in a when participants batted against a “live” bowler. Further-
“live” bowler condition. Action fidelity was supported, and more, data on the time at which peak bat swing time was
performance in one context (initial movements against a attained by the batters under video simulation conditions
video simulation) statistically corresponded with perfor- poses some challenges for such experimental designs. For
mance in the other context (e.g., that of a “live” bowler). example, in the video simulation task constraints, peak bat
This finding, while inconsistent with some previous work velocity occurred after the point at which interception was
comparing in situ and video-based designs (e.g., Dicks et predicted to have occurred (see Fig. 6). Batters were unable
al., 2010), may be attributable to the maintenance of a fully to accurately judge movement requirements without actual
simulated action (coupled response), rather than a simpli- ball flight and bounce location information, both of which
fied micro-movement reaction (such as a movement in the are important for enhancing the quality of interceptive
anticipated direction). Because of this methodological actions (see Müller et al., 2009). Either batters were not
advance, the video simulation allowed batters to couple able to attune to this information, or it could not be
preparatory movements to the prerelease and early ball- faithfully represented in the 2-D video simulation method-
flight information. Many researchers have previously ology. Our findings offer further support for previous
alluded to the possibility of using video simulation designs research demonstrating that the assessment of perceptual–
to study or train visual anticipation processes (Abernethy, motor performance using video-based simulation paradigms,
1252 Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254

particularly when perception and action are decoupled, can experiential (Renshaw & Chappell, 2010) reports showing
lead to serious errors by participants in judging projectile similar findings for senior and skilled batters.
interception location (for a collation of assessment studies, see The first stage of truly understanding how skilled
van der Kamp et al., 2008). Additionally, some possible performance in interceptive actions can be developed must
limitations of other methods of assessing interceptive timing be to measure and formally describe tasks that adequately
(e.g., comparison with coaches’ predictions; Taliep et al., capture the functional behavior of individuals in a specific
2007) and possible differences in the level of experience that performance environment, before posing questions on how
batters had in the three distinct conditions in the present individuals achieve knowledge about that environment
study should be acknowledged as issues in need of further (Araújo & Davids, 2009; Fajen et al., 2009; Pinder et al.,
study. in press). The concept of action fidelity could be used to
examine whether a performer’s responses (e.g., actions or
decisions based on availability of perceptual information)
Conclusions are the same under various task constraints. The use of
technological advances—for example, accelerometers and
The results of the present study revealed significant differ- gyroscopes (e.g., Busch & James, 2007)—may allow for an
ences in performance of developmental batters between a enhanced understanding and more detailed analysis of the
representative practice task (batting against a “live” bowler) adaption of movement responses under changing task
and both video simulation and ball projection machine task constraints.
constraints, traditionally used in the assessment of percep-
tual–motor skill in ball sports. The results demonstrated that Author Note This article was written while the first author was
the batters were able to functionally adapt behavior for each supported by a Queensland University of Technology International
specific set of task constraints (e.g., the regulation of spatial Postgraduate Scholarship Award. We would like to thank Brisbane
Grammar School and Darren Holder for providing access to the
characteristics under ball machine task constraints to
training facility and to participants for their commitment and
account for delays in movement initiations). However, the involvement in the study. We also would like to acknowledge the
removal of key perceptual variables to support action (both three anonymous reviewers for their insightful and valuable comments
prerelease and actual ball flight) suggested that empiricists on earlier versions of the manuscript.
should be cautious in interpreting which aspects can be
generalized from experimental to performance task con-
straints (e.g., kinetic and kinematic variables; Taliep et al., References
2007). It is feasible that current popular experimental
designs may actually be limiting progress in understanding
Abernethy, B., Wood, J. M., & Parks, S. L. (1999). Can the
and training perceptual and technical abilities of develop- anticipatory skills of experts be learned by novices? Research
mental performers in ball sports. In order to better Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 70, 313–318.
understand the characteristics of perceptual–motor skill Abernethy, B., & Zawi, K. (2007). Pickup of essential kinematics
underpins expert perception of movement patterns. Journal of
and how to develop them, empiricists should attempt to
Motor Behavior, 39, 353–367.
design experimental task constraints that are representative Abernethy, B., Zawi, K., & Jackson, R. C. (2008). Expertise and
of specific performance contexts. The representative task attunement to kinematic constraints. Perception, 37, 931–948.
adopted in the present study was that of a normal practice ACB. (1998). Australian cricket board national pace bowling
program resource kit. Melbourne: Australian Cricket Board.
context in the sport of cricket. Some may argue that
Araújo, D. (2007). Promoting ecologies where performers exhibit
differences may exist between observations of batting expert interactions. International Journal of Sport Psychology,
performance against a “live” bowler in a different context 38, 73–77.
(e.g., competitive sport). This concern was beyond the Araújo, D., & Davids, K. (2009). Ecological approaches to cognition and
action in sport and exercise: Ask not only what you do, but where
scope of the present study and is an important question for
you do it. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 40, 5–37.
future research to assess. Future work should also focus on Araújo, D., Davids, K., & Hristovski, R. (2006). The ecological
the assessment of learning design across various skill levels dynamics of decision making in sport. Psychology of Sport and
and temporal constraints (ball speeds), to assess how Exercise, 7, 653–676.
Araújo, D., Davids, K., & Passos, P. (2007). Ecological validity,
informational variables are used at different performance
representative design, and correspondence between experimental
development levels. Indeed, it is currently unknown task constraints and behavioral setting: Comment on Rogers,
whether the findings regarding video simulations presented Kadar, and Costall (2005). Ecological Psychology, 19, 69–78.
here would also be observed in groups of highly skilled or Atkinson, G., & Nevill, A. M. (1998). Statistical methods for
assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to
senior batters in elite sport programs, and this is another
sports medicine. Sports Medicine, 26, 217–238.
aspect that should be investigated in future work. However, Bartlett, R. M. (2007). Introduction to sports biomechanics: Analysing
there are both empirical (Renshaw et al., 2007) and human movement patterns. New York: Routledge.
Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254 1253

Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of Mann, D. L., Abernethy, B., & Farrow, D. (2010). The resiliance of
psychological experiments (2nd ed.). Berkeley: University of natural interceptive actions to refractive blur. Human Movement
California Press. Science, 29, 386–400.
Busch, A., & James, D. (2007). Analysis of cricket shots using inertial Mann, D. L., Ho, N. Y., De Souza, N. J., Watson, D. R., & Taylor, S.
sensors. In A. Subic, F. K. Fuss, & S. Ujihashi (Eds.), The impact J. (2007). Is optimal vision required for the successful execution
of technology on sport II (pp. 317–322). London: Taylor & of an interceptive task? Human Movement Science, 26, 343–356.
Francis. Mann, D. T. Y., Williams, A. M., Ward, P., & Janelle, C. M. (2007).
Caljouw, S. R., van der Kamp, J., & Savelsbergh, G. J. P. (2004). Perceptual–cognitive expertise in sport: A meta-analysis. Journal
Timing of goal-directed hitting: Impact requirements change the of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 29, 457–478.
information-movement coupling. Experimental Brain Research, McIntyre, D. R., & Pfautsch, E. W. (1982). A kinetic analysis of the
155, 135–144. baseball swings involved in opposite-field and same-field hitting.
Croft, J. L., Button, C., & Dicks, M. (2010). Visual strategies of sub-elite Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 53, 206–213.
cricket batsmen in response to different ball velocities. Human Messier, S. P., & Owen, M. G. (1984). Bat dynamics of female fast
Movement Science, 29, 751–763. pitch softball players. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,
Davids, K. (2008). Designing representative task constraints for 55, 141–145.
studying visual anticipation in fast ball sports: What we can Montagne, G. (2005). Prospective control in sport. International
learn from past and contemporary insights in neurobiology and Journal of Sport Psychology, 36, 127–150.
psychology. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 39, 166– Montagne, G., Bastin, J., & Jacobs, D. M. (2008). What is visual
177. anticipation and how much does it rely on the dorsal stream?
Davids, K., Button, C., Araújo, D., Renshaw, I., & Hristovski, R. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 39, 149–156.
(2006). Movement models from sports provide representative Montagne, G., Laurent, M., Durey, A., & Bootsma, R. (1999).
task constraints for studying adaptive behavior in human Movement reversals in ball catching. Experimental Brain
movement systems. Adaptive Behavior, 14, 73–95. Research, 129, 87–92.
Davids, K., Renshaw, I., & Glazier, P. (2005). Movement models from Müller, S., & Abernethy, B. (2006). Batting with occluded vision: An
sports reveal fundamental insights into coordination processes. in situ examination of the information pick-up and interceptive
Exercise and Sport Science Reviews, 33, 36–42. skills of high- and low-skilled cricket batsmen. Journal of
Dhami, M. K., Hertwig, R., & Hoffrage, U. (2004). The role of Science and Medicine in Sport, 9, 446–458.
representative design in ecological approach to cognition. Müller, S., & Abernethy, B. (2008). Validity and reliability of a simple
Psychological Bulletin, 130, 959–988. categorical tool for the assessment of interceptive skill. Journal
Dicks, M., Button, C., & Davids, K. (2010). Examination of gaze of Science and Medicine in Sport, 11, 549–552.
behaviors under in situ and video simulation task constraints Müller, S., Abernethy, B., Reece, J., Rose, M., Eid, M., McBean, R.,
reveals differences in information pickup for perception and et al. (2009). An in-situ examination of the timing of information
action. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 706–720. pick-up for interception by cricket batsmen of different skill
Dicks, M., Davids, K., & Araújo, D. (2008). Ecological psychology levels. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10, 644–652.
and task representativeness: Implications for the design of Pinder, R. A., Davids, K., Renshaw, I., & Araújo, D. (in press).
perceptual–motor training programmes in sport. In Y. Hong & Representative learning design and functionality of research and
R. Bartlett (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of biomechanics and practice in sport. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology.
human movement science (pp. 129–139). London: Routledge. Pinder, R. A., Renshaw, I., & Davids, K. (2009). Information-
Dunwoody, P. T. (2006). The neglect of the environment by cognitive movement coupling in developing cricketers under changing
psychology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, ecological practice constraints. Human Movement Science, 28,
26, 139–153. 468–479.
Fajen, B. R., Riley, M. A., & Turvey, M. T. (2009). Information, Regan, D. (1997). Visual factors in hitting and catching. Journal of
affordances and the control of action in sport. International Sports Sciences, 15, 533–558.
Journal of Sport Psychology, 40, 79–107. Renshaw, I., & Chappell, G. S. (2010). A constraints-led approach to
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London: talent development in cricket. In L. Kidman & B. Lombardo
Sage. (Eds.), Athlete-centred coaching (2nd ed., pp. 151–172). Christ-
Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. church: Innovative.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Renshaw, I., & Fairweather, M. M. (2000). Cricket bowling deliveries
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. and the discrimination ability of professional and amateur batters.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Journal of Sports Sciences, 18, 951–957.
Gibson, A. P., & Adams, R. D. (1989). Batting stroke timing with a Renshaw, I., Oldham, A. R. H., Davids, K., & Golds, T. (2007).
bowler and a bowling machine: A case study. Australian Journal Changing ecological constraints of practice alters coordination of
of Science and Medicine in Sport, 21, 3–6. dynamic interceptive actions. European Journal of Sport Science,
Hammond, K. R., & Stewart, T. R. (Eds.). (2001). The essential 7, 157–167.
Brunswik: Beginnings, explications, applications. New York: Rogers, W. A. (2008). Editorial. Journal of Experimental Psychology.
Oxford University Press. Applied, 14, 1–4.
Jackson, R. C., & Morgan, P. (2007). Advance visual information, Rowe, R. M., & McKenna, F. P. (2001). Skilled anticipation in real-world
awareness, and anticipation skill. Journal of Motor Behavior, 39, tasks: Measurement of attentional demands in the domain of tennis.
341–351. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 7, 60–67.
Jacobs, D. M., & Michaels, C. F. (2002). On the apparent paradox of Savelsbergh, G. J. P., & Bootsma, R. J. (1994). Perception–action
learning and realism. Ecological Psychology, 14, 127–139. coupling in hitting and catching. International Journal of Sport
Land, M. F., & McLeod, P. (2000). From eye movements to actions: Psychology, 25, 331–343.
How batsmen hit the ball. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 1340–1345. Shibayama, H., & Ebashi, H. (1983). Development of a motor skill using
Le Runigo, C., Benguigui, N., & Bardy, B. G. (2005). Perception–action the golf swing from the viewpoint of the regulation of muscle
and expertise in interceptive actions. Human Movement Science, 24, activity. In H. Matsui & K. Kobayashi (Eds.), Biomechanics VIII
429–445. (pp. 895–902). Champaign: Human Kinetics.
1254 Atten Percept Psychophys (2011) 73:1242–1254

Shim, J., Carlton, L. G., Chow, J. W., & Chae, W. K. (2005). The use Vincent, J. (1994). Statistics in kinesiology. Champaign: Human
of anticipatory visual cues by highly skilled tennis players. Kinetics.
Journal of Motor Behavior, 37, 164–175. Warren, W. H. (2006). The dynamics of perception and action.
Shim, J., Carlton, L. G., & Kwon, Y. H. (2006). Perception of kinematic Psychological Review, 113, 358–389.
characteristics of tennis strokes for anticipating stroke type and Weissensteiner, J., Abernethy, B., & Farrow, D. (2009). Examining the
direction. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 77, 326–339. development of technical skill in cricket batting. Paper presented
Stoffregen, T. A., Bardy, B. G., Smart, L. J., & Pagulayan, R. (2003). at the 7th Australasian Biomechanics Conference, Gold Coast,
On the nature and evaluation of fidelity in virtual environments. Queensland, Australia. November–December.
In L. J. Hettinger & M. W. Haas (Eds.), Virtual and adaptive Weissensteiner, J., Abernethy, B., Farrow, D., & Müller, S. (2008).
environments: Applications, implications and human performance The development of anticipation: A cross-sectional examination
issues (pp. 111–128). Mahwah: Erlbaum. of the practice experiences contributing to skill in cricket batting.
Stretch, R. A., Buys, F., Du Toit, E., & Viljoen, G. (1998). Kinematics Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 30, 663–684.
and kinetics of the drive off the front foot in cricket batting. Williams, A. M., & McRobert, A. (2008). Perceptual–cognitive skills
Journal of Sports Sciences, 16, 711–720. in cricket batting: From testing to training. In T. Reilly (Ed.),
Taliep, M. S., Galal, U., & Vaughan, C. L. (2007). The position of the Science and sports: Bridging the gap. Maastricht: Shaker.
head and centre of mass during the front foot off-drive in skilled and Williams, A. M., Ward, P., & Chapman, C. (2003). Training perceptual
less-skilled cricket batsmen. Sports Biomechanics, 6, 345–360. skill in field hockey: Is there transfer from the laboratory to the field?
van der Kamp, J., Rivas, F., van Doorn, H., & Savelsbergh, G. (2008). Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74, 98–103.
Ventral and dorsal contributions in visual anticipation in fast ball Woolmer, B., Noakes, T. D., & Moffett, H. (2008). Bob Woolmer’s art
sports. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 39, 100–130. and science of cricket. London: New Holland.

View publication stats