Review: The Quiet Eye in Sports Performance—Is the Quiet Eye the Ultimate Explanation or Only the Beginning?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SIGNIFICANCE: The quiet eye is a gaze behavior that seems to differentiate both expert-novice performance and successful and unsuccessful performance in experts; however, the quiet eye may only represent one aspect of the perceptual-cognitive expertise differences that exist between athletes and nonathletes.Research suggests that expert-novice differences in vision and visual-motor coordination skills exist between athletes and nonathletes, although the underlying mechanisms driving these differences are not well understood. The quiet eye is the final fixation or tracking gaze made before the initiation of the action of importance in a motor coordination task and is quite possibly the most well-studied vision strategy variable in sport. The quiet eye has been shown to be a key component of both expert ability and successful performance. However, the quiet eye is not without its criticisms, and the perceptual mechanisms underlying this unique gaze behavior are not yet well understood. The question that remains to be answered is whether the differences in vision and visual-motor coordination skills that exist between athletes and nonathletes can be explained by the quiet eye alone or if the explanation is more complicated.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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.
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".