MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035445952 · doi:10.22374/jspv.v2i1.3

Visual Fixation in NBA Free-Throws and the Relationship to On-Court Performance

2020· article· en· W3035445952 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daniel M. Laby

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sports and Performance Vision · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasketballFixation (population genetics)Eye trackingVisual searchPsychologyDescriptive statisticsApplied psychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCognitive psychologyStatisticsMathematicsMedicineGeographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Although hitting a baseball is often described as the most difficult task in all of sports, shooting baskets during a game likely ranks a close second. Previous studies have described the role of vision in basketball and more specifically a concept termed the “quiet eye” has been shown to be related to basketball performance. How a shooter visualizes the target, how consistent their visual fixation is, and how long they maintain that fixation has been correlated to shooting success. Although the majority of previous reports have included non-professional basketball shooters, we evaluated NBA (National Basketball Association) players to determine if this skill was significant at the professional level. Materials and Methods We evaluated 16 professional NBA players prior to the 2018-2019 NBA season. All players shot 30 consecutive free-throws while wearing Tobii Pro eye-tracking glasses. Following the completion of the task, several metrics were calculated including shooting success rate, as well as four measures of the position and duration of ocular fixation just prior to, during, and immediately after ball release for each shot of each player. Additionally, player performance statistics from the 2018-2019 season were recorded and compared to the visual fixation data. Descriptive statistics as well as correlations between the visual fixation metrics and on-court performance metrics were calculated. Results NBA shooters averaged a 79% success rate in free throw shooting (SD = 14%, min = 56%, max=100%) during the study. Moderate statistically significant correlations were found between the percentage of successful free throws and the four measures of visual fixation (r=0.539 to 0.687). In addition, visual fixation measures were found to be corelated with on-court metrics suggesting that shooters who had more frequent, as well as longer, fixations on the rim where more likely to have lower USG%, and ORB% as well as higher FG3%. The percentage of successful shots in the study was compared to the on-court FT% and found to be moderately correlated (r=0.536). Conclusions The need to maintain ocular fixation on the rim as one shoots seems elementary, but in fact varies greatly among NBA players, as noted in these results. Our data suggests that players who visually fixate longer and more frequently on the rim are more likely to be successful in free throws, as well as more successful in 3-point goals. Likely due to their likely distance from the basket, they do not make as many offensive rebounds. This data set appears to describe basketball guards in contrast to forwards/centers and supports previous research on non-professional basketball players.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sports and Performance VisionSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207