↓ Skip to main content

Self-Organization Processes in Field-Invasion Team Sports

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
Title
Self-Organization Processes in Field-Invasion Team Sports
Published in
Sports Medicine, November 2012
DOI 10.1007/s40279-012-0001-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pedro Passos, Duarte Araújo, Keith Davids

Abstract

In nature, the interactions between agents in a complex system (fish schools; colonies of ants) are governed by information that is locally created. Each agent self-organizes (adjusts) its behaviour, not through a central command centre, but based on variables that emerge from the interactions with other system agents in the neighbourhood. Self-organization has been proposed as a mechanism to explain the tendencies for individual performers to interact with each other in field-invasion sports teams, displaying functional co-adaptive behaviours, without the need for central control. The relevance of self-organization as a mechanism that explains pattern-forming dynamics within attacker-defender interactions in field-invasion sports has been sustained in the literature. Nonetheless, other levels of interpersonal coordination, such as intra-team interactions, still raise important questions, particularly with reference to the role of leadership or match strategies that have been prescribed in advance by a coach. The existence of key properties of complex systems, such as system degeneracy, nonlinearity or contextual dependency, suggests that self-organization is a functional mechanism to explain the emergence of interpersonal coordination tendencies within intra-team interactions. In this opinion article we propose how leadership may act as a key constraint on the emergent, self-organizational tendencies of performers in field-invasion sports.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 125 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 19%
Researcher 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Professor 8 6%
Other 26 20%
Unknown 24 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 63 49%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Psychology 8 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Computer Science 4 3%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 25 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 May 2020.
All research outputs
#4,180,284
of 25,760,414 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,848
of 2,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,753
of 195,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#349
of 838 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,760,414 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,897 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 57.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 195,621 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 838 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.