150 likes | 333 Views
Preparatory Hand Motion in Pre-performance Routines. By Justin DiSanti. Pre-performance Routines. Slow-motion Dart Throw. Pre-performance Routines. “Cognitive behavioral pre-performance routines in sport” (Cohn, 1990) Prior to practiced, repeated action Muscle memory Gross body movement
E N D
Preparatory Hand Motion in Pre-performance Routines By Justin DiSanti
Pre-performance Routines Slow-motion Dart Throw
Pre-performance Routines • “Cognitive behavioral pre-performance routines in sport” (Cohn, 1990) • Prior to practiced, repeated action • Muscle memory • Gross body movement • Superstition • Conscious, practice • Preparatory Hand Motion • Unconscious motion of the hand in preparation of a fixed action • Action involving precision and aim • Focus on unconscious, unpracticed • Hypothesis • Optimal patterns of preparatory hand motion begin to develop unconsciously as a person becomes more proficient at a repeated task
Hypotheses • Hypothesis: Variance of hand preparation motion (HPM) is directly related to the width of the target zone • Alternative hypothesis: Variance of HPM is inversely related to the width of the target zone • H0: There is no relation between variance of HPM and the width of target zone
Variance in HPM VS. Width of Target Zone Variance of HPM (cm) Width of Target Zone (cm)
Hypotheses (cont.) • Hypothesis: Number of movements in hand preparation motion (HPM) is relatedinversely to the width of the target zone • Alternative hypothesis: Number of movements in HPM is directly related to the width of the target zone • H0: There is no relation between number of movements in HPM and the width of the target zone
Number of Movements in HPM VS. Width of Target Zone Number of Movements in HPM Width of Target Zone (cm)
Hypotheses (cont.) • Hypothesis: Probability of success in a fixed action is predicted by optimal variance in hand preparation motion • Alternative hypotheses: Probability of success in a fixed action is directly/inversely proportional to variance in hand preparation motion • H0: There is no relation between probability of success in a fixed action and variance in hand preparation motion
Probability of Success VS. Variance of HPM Probability of Task Success Variance of HPM (cm)
Experiment 1 Subject View Stopper PASCO low-friction track Cue Card 16 pts X Target 2 Books Target 1 Table Surface Motion Sensor Starting Point
Experiment 1 • Setup Overhead View X Starting Point Target 1 Target 2
Experiment 1 • Method • Participant stands parallel to track with hand on the middle of the cart • The “X” on the cart should be lined up with the starting zone • Participant begins with their eyes closed • The experimenter adjusts the target zone and corresponding point value • Participant opens eyes, evaluates point value and target distance, then launches the cart • The goal of the experiment is to launch the cart and have it reverse within the target zone • When center of the cart (marked by “X) reverses correctly within the target distance, the participant is rewarded points (20 trials) 16 pts. X
Results Run 3Blue line, missed target zone of 20 cm -Variance of HPM smaller, more preparatory motions, longer time until launch Run 4Orange line, correctly reversed target zone of 40 cm -Variance of HPM larger than 4, less preparatory motions
Predictions & Implications • Intentional or not, participants become more consistent with preparatory motion as the experiment progresses • Less frequent, longer range of motion for larger targets • More frequent, shorter range of motion for shorter targets • Is there an optimal formula for preparatory hand motion? • Is motion wasted/unnecessary? • How do individual differences affect this motion? • Can preparatory hand motion be trained to maximize performance?