MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033649923 · doi:10.36315/2019v2end010

A PERCEPTUAL-COGNITIVE PROGRAM TO TRAIN SOCCER PLAYERS’ DECISION MAKING

2019· article· en· W3033649923 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation and new developments · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionContext (archaeology)Applied psychologyCognitionPsychologyAthletesEliteProcess (computing)Cognitive psychologyMultimediaComputer sciencePhysical therapyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elite sport is all about making the right decision, at the right time, under pressure and in any context Many tools are available to train decision-making skills. One used commonly in elite level sports is video feedback. However, with young players, this tool is rarely used due to time constraints and athlete-coach ratio. Nowadays, an alternative to video feedback is used in the form of a perceptual-cognitive exercise This exercise has significant effects on decision-making skills when used during warm-ups, but cumulative effects have not been measured Also, perceptual-cognitive exercise has mainly been studied in experimental contexts, leaving few considerations for athletes and coaches' reality. Therefore, this study aims to help a coach integrate perceptual-cognitive exercises in his training program. The first objective is to describe the clinical supervision process offered to a youth coach. Sub-objectives involve (a) understanding the different phases of the clinical supervision and (b) measuring players' performance as indication of change. The second objective is to describe players and coach's perceptions about quality and effectiveness of such program. One female coach participated in the study, as did her 27 young female players (M=12,25 0,28). They completed a six-week perceptual-cognitive program, twice a week. To jot down the supervision process, a log-book was used by the researcher during 16 weeks. Players' performance was measured with Stivi software for response time and decision accuracy during practice (n=13). Decision accuracy in game was measured with observation grids, three times: week one, six, and three weeks post intervention. As for actors' perceptions, focus groups were used with players' (n=2x8) and an individual semi-structured interview was used with the coach (n=1). Findings indicate that the clinical supervision process presents three phases. In the programming phase, results show that building sequences alone for perceptual-cognitive exercises is complex and time consuming, and thus unlikely to be attempted by the coach alone. In the interaction phase, the six week program was easily integrated to the training schedule. Also, the coach noted positive changes in her players, such as search for information at play and verbal support to partners holding the ball. Also, results show a slight decrease for response time and increase for decision accuracy. Finally, during the evaluation phase, performance measures enabled an objective analysis of advantages and limits of the proposed program.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.378 · 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