abstract, or a moving target (cf. Vickers, 2007 ). For example, it has been demonstrated that in basketball free throws, gaze should be focused on the basketball hoop well before movement initiation and remains at this location until ball release. Vickers ( 1996 ) labeled this phenomenon as quiet eye (QE
André Klostermann, Ralf Kredel and Ernst-Joachim Hossner
Greg Wood, Samuel J. Vine, Johnny Parr and Mark R. Wilson
performance (see Mann, Williams, Ward, & Janelle, 2007 for a review). One such measure, the quiet eye (QE; Vickers, 1996 )—defined as the duration of the final fixation toward a relevant target before the initiation of a critical movement—has been proposed to provide a period of cognitive preprogramming of
Ebrahim Norouzi, Fatemeh Sadat Hosseini, Mohammad Vaezmosavi, Markus Gerber, Uwe Pühse and Serge Brand
sought to determine the efficacy of three training methods: quiet mind training (QMT), quiet eye training (QET), and physical training (control). Our goal was to determine which might be the best intervention in terms of promoting implicit motor learning, which is associated with improved performance
Jean-Charles Lebeau, Sicong Liu, Camilo Sáenz-Moncaleano, Susana Sanduvete-Chaves, Salvador Chacón-Moscoso, Betsy Jane Becker and Gershon Tenenbaum
Research linking the “quiet eye” (QE) period to subsequent performance has not been systematically synthesized. In this paper we review the literature on the link between the two through nonintervention (Synthesis 1) and intervention (Synthesis 2) studies. In the first synthesis, 27 studies with 38 effect sizes resulted in a large mean effect (d = 1.04) reflecting differences between experts’ and novices’ QE periods, and a moderate effect size (d = 0.58) comparing QE periods for successful and unsuccessful performances within individuals. Studies reporting QE duration as a percentage of the total time revealed a larger mean effect size than studies reporting an absolute duration (in milliseconds). The second synthesis of 9 articles revealed very large effect sizes for both the quiet-eye period (d = 1.53) and performance (d = 0.84). QE also showed some ability to predict performance effects across studies.
Shawnee K. Harle and Joan N. Vickers
University basketball players (Team A) received quiet eye (QE) training over two seasons of league play, compared to two control teams (Team B and Team C), who competed at the top of the same league but did not receive similar training. QE was defined as the player’s final fixation on the hoop or backboard prior to the shooting action. In Season 1, Team A improved significantly, Pre to Post, in experimental accuracy, QE duration, and relative shot timing but did not transfer these improvements to league play during the season. At the conclusion of Season 2, Team A improved their free throw shooting accuracy by 22.62% to 76.66%, more than Team A (66.18%) or B (74.05%). The results highlight the importance of training a sustained duration of QE on a single location on the hoop prior to the execution of the shooting action. Theoretical and applied implications of training QE are discussed, and recommendations are made for future research and training.
Guoxiao Sun, Liwei Zhang, Samuel J. Vine and Mark R. Wilson
Longer quiet eye (QE) periods are associated with better performance across a range of targeting and interceptive tasks. However, the direction of this relationship is still unclear. The two studies presented aimed to narrow this knowledge gap by experimentally manipulating QE duration—by delaying its onset or by truncating its offset—in an aiming interceptive task. In Experiment 1, the early trajectory was occluded, causing significantly shorter QE durations and worse subsequent performance. In Experiment 2, both early and/or late trajectory were occluded. Performance was degraded by the occlusion of either early or late information, and the worst performance occurred when both the early and late trajectory were occluded. Taken together, the results suggest that QE is not a by-product of performance but instead plays a causal role in supporting the interception of a moving target through a combination of preprogramming and online control processes.
André Klostermann, Ralf Kredel and Ernst-Joachim Hossner
To date, despite a large body of evidence in favor of the advantage of an effect-related focus of attention compared with a movement-related focus of attention in motor control and learning, the role of vision in this context remains unclear. Therefore, in a golf-putting study, the relation between attentional focus and gaze behavior (in particular, quiet eye, or QE) was investigated. First, the advantage of an effect-related focus, as well as of a long QE duration, could be replicated. Furthermore, in the online-demanding task of golf putting, high performance was associated with later QE offsets. Most decisively, an interaction between attentional focus and gaze behavior was revealed in such a way that the efficiency of the QE selectively manifested under movement-related focus instructions. As these findings suggest neither additive effects nor a causal chain, an alternative hypothesis is introduced explaining positive QE effects by the inhibition of not-to-be parameterized movement variants.
Camilo Sáenz-Moncaleano, Itay Basevitch and Gershon Tenenbaum
termed the quiet eye (QE; Vickers, 1992 ). The QE is a particular gaze that is defined as the final fixation or pursuit tracking gaze before the initiation of a specific motor response ( Vickers, 2007 ). Specifically, it is the elapsed time between the last visual fixation on a target before motor
Emmanuel Ducrocq, Mark Wilson, Tim J. Smith and Nazanin Derakshan
-directed behavior in both cognitive and sporting tasks (see Eysenck & Wilson, 2016 ; Moran et al., 2016 for reviews). The quiet eye (QE; Vickers, 1996 ) is a widely used index of attentional control in sports and is defined as the final fixation or tracking gaze toward a relevant target prior to the critical