We examined the effects of high- versus low-anxiety conditions during video-based training of anticipation judgments using international-level badminton players facing serves and the transfer to high-anxiety and field-based conditions. Players were assigned to a high-anxiety training (HA), low-anxiety training (LA) or control group (CON) in a pretraining–posttest design. In the pre- and posttest, players anticipated serves from video and on court under high- and low-anxiety conditions. In the video-based high-anxiety pretest, anticipation response accuracy was lower and final fixations shorter when compared with the low-anxiety pretest. In the low-anxiety posttest, HA and LA demonstrated greater accuracy of judgments and longer final fixations compared with pretest and CON. In the high-anxiety posttest, HA maintained accuracy when compared with the low-anxiety posttest, whereas LA had lower accuracy. In the on-court posttest, the training groups demonstrated greater accuracy of judgments compared with the pretest and CON.
David Alder is with the Carnegie Faculty, Leeds Beckett University, U.K. Paul R. Ford with the Centre for Sport and Exercise Science and Medicine, University of Brighton, U.K. Joe Causer is with the Research Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, U.K. A. Mark Williams is with Department of Life Sciences, Brunel University, U.K.