↓ Skip to main content

The Level of Vision Necessary for Competitive Performance in Rifle Shooting: Setting the Standards for Paralympic Shooting with Vision Impairment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, November 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
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
The Level of Vision Necessary for Competitive Performance in Rifle Shooting: Setting the Standards for Paralympic Shooting with Vision Impairment
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01731
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter M. Allen, Keziah Latham, David L. Mann, Rianne H. J. C. Ravensbergen, Joy Myint

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the level of vision impairment (VI) that would reduce performance in shooting; to guide development of entry criteria to visually impaired (VI) shooting. Nineteen international-level shooters without VI took part in the study. Participants shot an air rifle, while standing, toward a regulation target placed at the end of a 10 m shooting range. Cambridge simulation glasses were used to simulate six different levels of VI. Visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) were assessed along with shooting performance in each of seven conditions of simulated impairment and compared to that with habitual vision. Shooting performance was evaluated by calculating each individual's average score in every level of simulated VI and normalizing this score by expressing it as a percentage of the baseline performance achieved with habitual vision. Receiver Operating Characteristic curves were constructed to evaluate the ability of different VA and CS cut-off criteria to appropriately classify these athletes as achieving 'expected' or 'below expected' shooting results based on their performance with different levels of VA and CS. Shooting performance remained relatively unaffected by mild decreases in VA and CS, but quickly deteriorated with more moderate losses. The ability of visual function measurements to classify shooting performance was good, with 78% of performances appropriately classified using a cut-off of 0.53 logMAR and 74% appropriately classified using a cut-off of 0.83 logCS. The current inclusion criteria for VI shooting (1.0 logMAR) is conservative, maximizing the chance of including only those with an impairment that does impact performance, but potentially excluding some who do have a genuine impairment in the sport. A lower level of impairment would include more athletes who do have a genuine impairment but would potentially include those who do not actually have an impairment that impacts performance in the sport. An impairment to CS could impact performance in the sport and might be considered in determining eligibility to take part in VI competition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 59 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 16%
Researcher 7 11%
Professor 5 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 5%
Other 15 25%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 14 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 15%
Psychology 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 17 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 12 December 2016.
All research outputs
#13,239,967
of 23,337,345 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#12,288
of 31,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,363
of 314,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#229
of 437 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,337,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,054 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
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 314,396 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 437 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.