Abstract

In many kinds of sports, deceptive actions are frequently used to hamper the anticipation of an opponent. The head fake in basketball is often applied to deceive an observer regarding the direction of a pass. To perform a head fake, a basketball player turns the head in one direction, but passes the ball to the opposite direction. Several studies showed that reactions to passes with head fakes are slower and more error-prone than to passes without head fakes (head-fake effect). The aim of a basketball player is to produce a head-fake effect for as large as possible in the opponent. The question if the timing of the deceptive action influences the size of the head-fake effect has not yet been examined systematically. The present study investigated if the head-fake effect depends on the temporal lag between the head turn and the passing movement. To this end, the stimulus onset asynchrony between head turn, and pass was varied between 0 and 800 ms. The results showed the largest effect when the head turn precedes the pass by 300 ms. This result can be explained better by facilitating the processing of passes without head fake than by making it more difficult to process passes with a head fake. This result is discussed regarding practical implications and conclusions about the underlying mechanism of the head–fake effect in basketball are drawn.

Highlights

  • The ability to anticipate the forthcoming actions of others is crucial in many competitive sports, in which athletes predict the actions of team members and/or opponents under high time pressure

  • The study was conducted in accordance with the seventh revision (Fortaleza) of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki by the World Medical Association (WMA)

  • The present study investigated the optimal temporal lag between the head turn and pass initiation on the size of the head-fake effect in basketball

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The ability to anticipate the forthcoming actions of others is crucial in many competitive sports, in which athletes predict the actions of team members and/or opponents under high time pressure. Can be hampered by the deliberate use of deceptive actions [for a review on deceptive actions in sports, see 1]. Following Jackson and colleagues [2], deceptive actions can be distinguished into two categories: actions with the aim to disguise true intentions and those with the aim to deceive the opponent. The former refers to the minimization of that kind of movement information, which is helpful to predict a particular action.

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call