Laterality of a second player position affects lateral deviation of basketball shooting

Abstract Asymmetrically placed visual distractors are known to cause a lateral bias in the execution of a movement directed toward a target. The aim of the present experiment was to verify if the trajectory of the ball and the trajectory of the jump for a basket-shot can be affected by the sole position of a second player, who stays in front of the shooting player in one of three possible positions (centre, left or right) but too far to physically interfere with the shot. Young basketball players were asked to perform 60 shots at 6.25 m from a regular basket, with or without a second player staying in front of them in, alternately, a centre, left or right position. A computerised system measured the angular deviation of the jump direction from the vertical direction and the lateral deviation of the ball trajectory from the midline. The results showed that both the jump direction and the entry position of the ball deviated toward the opposite side from the second player’s side; however, these effects were too small to significantly affect the mean goal percentage. This result confirms that some placements of the players can have an effect as visual distractors. Further studies are necessary to find what game conditions can make such distractors harmful for the athletic performance.

[1]  R. Baumeister,et al.  A review of paradoxical performance effects: Choking under pressure in sports and mental tests , 1986 .

[2]  Ken Nakayama,et al.  Automatic adjustment of visuomotor readiness. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[3]  M. H. Fischer,et al.  Less Attention and More Perception in Cued Line Bisection , 1994, Brain and Cognition.

[4]  M. Gentilucci,et al.  Visual distractors differentially interfere with the reaching and grasping components of prehension movements , 1998, Experimental Brain Research.

[5]  F J Rojas,et al.  Kinematic adjustments in the basketball jump shot against an opponent , 2000, Ergonomics.

[6]  G Rizzolatti,et al.  Study of selective reaching and grasping in a patient with unilateral parietal lesion. Dissociated effects of residual spatial neglect. , 1993, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[7]  Kenneth M. Heilman,et al.  The Influence of Center of Mass Effect on the Distribution of Spatial Attention in the Vertical and Horizontal Dimensions , 1997, Brain and Cognition.

[8]  M. H. Fischer,et al.  Distractor Interference in Selective Reaching: Effects of Hemispace, Movement Direction, and Type of Movement , 2007, Cortex.

[9]  S. Chieffi Influence of Perceptual Factors on Line Bisection , 1999, Cortex.

[10]  G. Geisler,et al.  The effects of self-esteem, self-efficacy, and audience presence on soccer penalty shot performance , 1997 .

[11]  S. Chieffi,et al.  Influence of Visual Distractors on Movement Trajectory , 2001, Cortex.

[12]  J. Smeets,et al.  The relation between task history and movement strategy , 2002, Behavioural Brain Research.

[13]  S P Tipper,et al.  Action-based mechanisms of attention. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[14]  S. Tipper,et al.  Hand deviations away from visual cues: Indirect evidence for inhibition , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[15]  David L. Sheinberg,et al.  Distractor familiarity leads to more efficient visual search for complex stimuli , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  S Chieffi,et al.  Effects of stimulus asymmetry on line bisection , 1996, Neurology.

[17]  S. Chieffi,et al.  Influence of Contextual Stimuli on Line Bisection , 2002, Perceptual and motor skills.