Effect of Guided Tactical Breathing with Biofeedback on Acute Stress Attenuation and Marksmanship Performance of Novice Shooters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study introduced a novel approach to inducing stress, and examining effects of wearable and mobile technology-assisted tactical breathing with real-time heartrate biofeedback, on the attenuation of acute stress, post-stressor recovery and performance. 39 participants with no prior experience with firearms participated in a marksmanship task engaging stationary targets with a semi-automatic rifle, at a controlled indoor shooting range. Novice shooters applying guided tactical breathing with biofeedback following exposure to the shooting task, were able to maintain lower arousal (uninhibited parasympathetic system). Findings suggested significant effect of intervention with biofeedback on stress attenuation, however no significant improvement of marksmanship performance among novice shooters resulting from the intervention was found. This study provides insights into app-led tactical breathing training to control arousal levels during stress, recommending strategies on further evaluation of the effectiveness of mobile and wearable technologies on stress attenuation for varying levels of marksmanship skill and individual difference.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".