MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994377727 · doi:10.5114/hm.2020.88154

Can multimedia enhance tactical teaching-learning-training in soccer? The case of Sphero™

2019· article· en· W2994377727 on OpenAlexaffabout
Grégory Hallé Petiot, Rodrigo Aquino, Valérie Lehmann

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Movement · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLecture hallMovement (music)Training (meteorology)MultimediaMedicineComputer scienceGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The study aimed to compare the players’ and coach’s individual perception of tactical competence before and after an intervention based on imagery techniques and a multimedia resource (SpheroTM). Methods SpheroTM, a teleguided miniature ball rolling in any direction, was applied to teach tactics before and during training sessions and games over a 5-week specific training program. The ball was used to represent a game ball, and cones were placed on a miniature soccer pitch to simulate the play and explain the coach’s directives. The execution and the understanding of pre-game directives were respectively evaluated by the coach and the players themselves, before and after the training program. An empirical pre-post treatment was used to compare 245 rates provided by 14 players of an under-14 amateur soccer team in Canada. Descriptive analysis was performed and the t-test or Wilcoxon test (z) were used for pairedcomparison (pre- vs. post-training). The statistical significance of the results was set at p < 0.05. Results After 5 weeks of training with the use of SpheroTM, results showed that the players appreciated their ability to play in accordance with directives, and that the coach was able to observe his directives through how they played, although the assessment scores of understanding remained the same. Conclusions A teaching setup involving SpheroTM allowed a good understanding but training was necessary to reach better assessment scores for the actual application of the directives.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman MovementSame topicSports injuries and preventionFrench-language works237,207