↓ Skip to main content

Contrast Sensitivity Is a Significant Predictor of Performance in Rifle Shooting for Athletes With Vision Impairment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Contrast Sensitivity Is a Significant Predictor of Performance in Rifle Shooting for Athletes With Vision Impairment
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00950
Pubmed ID
Authors

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

Abstract

Purpose: In order to develop an evidence-based, sport-specific minimum impairment criteria (MIC) for the sport of vision-impaired (VI) shooting, this study aimed to determine the relative influence of losses in visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) on shooting performance. Presently, VA but not CS is used to determine eligibility to compete in VI shooting. Methods: Elite able-sighted athletes (n = 27) shot under standard conditions with their habitual vision, and with their vision impaired by the use of simulation spectacles (filters which reduce both VA and CS) and refractive blur (lenses which reduce VA with less effect on CS). Habitual shooting scores were used to establish a cut-off in order to determine when shooting performance was 'below expected' in the presence of vision impairment. Logistic regression and decision tree analyses were then used to assess the relationship between visual function and shooting performance. Results: Mild reductions in VA and/or CS did not alter shooting performance, with greater reductions required for shooting performance to fall below habitual levels (below 87% of normalized performance). Stepwise logistic regression selected CS as the most significant predictor of shooting performance, with VA subsequently improving the validity of the model. In an unconstrained decision tree analysis, CS was selected as the sole criterion (80%) for predicting 'below expected' shooting score. Conclusion: Shooting performance is better predicted by losses in CS than by VA. Given that it is not presently tested during classification, the results suggest that CS is an important measure to include in testing for the classification of vision impairment for athletes competing in VI shooting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 15%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 3%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 20 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 11 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Psychology 4 7%
Engineering 4 7%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 26 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 11 July 2018.
All research outputs
#6,975,487
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,892
of 31,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,115
of 330,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#330
of 709 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,443 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 68% 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 330,014 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 709 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 53% of its contemporaries.