MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327951620 · doi:10.1080/1612197x.2023.2191628

Effects of motor imagery training on service performance in novice tennis players: the role of imagery ability

2023· article· en· W4327951620 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Robin, Robbin Carien, Khaled Taktek, Vanessa Hatchi, Laurent Dominique

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySession (web analytics)Test (biology)Motor imageryPsychological interventionApplied psychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to examine how imagery ability could affect service improvement, following pre-performance motor imagery (MI) intervention, in young novice tennis players. Participants were divided into 3 groups with regard to their MI ability scores (Poor imager, Good imager and Control groups) obtained on the Movement Imagery Questionnaire for Children. During a pre-test, participants performed 10 services. The pre-performance MI practice was included during physical practice for 24 sessions. Each session consisted of 20 services, which were first imagined and then physically performed. Participants of the Poor and Good imager groups were required to use external visual MI, while those of the control group were given a countdown task. Participants performed an intermediate-test, after a first block of 12 practice sessions, and a post-test one-week after the last block of practice session, which were identical to the pre-test. The results of this study showed that MI improved service performance (i.e., percentage of success, speed and efficiency), and that this improvement was faster in the Good imager than in the Poor imager group. More specifically, The Poor imager group required more MI interventions to achieve equivalent performance to Good imager group. The impact of MI practice on service performance, for novice tennis players, is discussed.

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 score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sport and Exercise PsychologySame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207