↓ Skip to main content

Self-Reported Responses to Player Profile Questions Show Consistency with the Use of Complex Attentional Strategies by Expert Horseshoe Pitchers

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Self-Reported Responses to Player Profile Questions Show Consistency with the Use of Complex Attentional Strategies by Expert Horseshoe Pitchers
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01028
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeffrey T. Fairbrother, Phillip G. Post, Sam J. Whalen

Abstract

The advantages on an external focus of attention have been demonstrated for a variety of sport tasks. The constrained action hypothesis (Wulf et al., 2001) argues that focusing externally on the movement effect results in the use of automated processes for movement control. In contrast, focusing internally in an attempt to control the movements of the body disrupts normally automated processes and degrades performance. Research on experts, however, suggests that they may adopt more complex attentional strategies. The present study provided a unique opportunity to examine expert horseshoe players' attentional strategies as indicated by their self-reported responses to questions included in a National Horseshoe Pitchers Association (NHPA) player profile questionnaire. Responses submitted by 83 top NHPA players were examined to determine the frequency of references to the use of internal and external focus points and identify categories related to attentional strategies. Results indicated that the large majority of players reported using focus points that are consistent with an external focus of attention and that their thoughts corresponded to one or more categories related to technique, mental focus or concentration, general success, use of external focus cues, and emotional control. The findings are consistent with the view that experts may adopt complex attentional strategies that encompass both an external focus and thoughts about a variety of other performance related factors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 15%
Student > Master 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 7 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 7 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Psychology 3 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 11 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 August 2016.
All research outputs
#16,170,701
of 25,559,053 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#17,103
of 34,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,776
of 370,896 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#256
of 390 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,559,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,647 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 370,896 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 390 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.