↓ Skip to main content

Exposing an “Intangible” Cognitive Skill among Collegiate Football Players: Enhanced Interference Control

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
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 (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
Exposing an “Intangible” Cognitive Skill among Collegiate Football Players: Enhanced Interference Control
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00049
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scott A. Wylie, Theodore R. Bashore, Nelleke C. Van Wouwe, Emily J. Mason, Kevin D. John, Joseph S. Neimat, Brandon A. Ally

Abstract

American football is played in a chaotic visual environment filled with relevant and distracting information. We investigated the hypothesis that collegiate football players show exceptional skill at shielding their response execution from the interfering effects of distraction (interference control). The performances of 280 football players from National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I football programs were compared to age-matched controls in a variant of the Eriksen flanker task (Eriksen and Eriksen, 1974). This task quantifies the magnitude of interference produced by visual distraction on split-second response execution. Overall, football athletes and age controls showed similar mean reaction times (RTs) and accuracy rates. However, football athletes were more proficient at shielding their response execution speed from the interfering effects of distraction (i.e., smaller flanker effect costs on RT). Offensive and defensive players showed smaller interference costs compared to controls, but defensive players showed the smallest costs. All defensive positions and one offensive position showed statistically smaller interference effects when compared directly to age controls. These data reveal a clear cognitive advantage among football athletes at executing motor responses in the face of distraction, the existence and magnitude of which vary by position. Individual differences in cognitive control may have important implications for both player selection and development to improveinterference controlcapabilities during play.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 15%
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Professor 5 6%
Student > Postgraduate 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 30 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 13 16%
Psychology 10 13%
Neuroscience 6 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 34 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 06 April 2023.
All research outputs
#3,345,898
of 25,292,646 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,395
of 34,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,784
of 455,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#132
of 510 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,292,646 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,158 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 455,171 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 510 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 74% of its contemporaries.