Abstract Marksmanship is a critical skill for military, law enforcement, and security professionals as well as recreational shooters who participate in competitions or hunting. Unfortunately, skill assessments vary wildly between branches of military service and even more so when compared with local law enforcement or security requirements. This heterogeneity creates wide-ranging opinions about what constitutes a firearm expert, with people claiming expertise despite only rudimentary training. The high degree of subjectivity undermines communication between firearm professionals and raises questions about the value of opinions. The current investigation thus explored self-reported marksmanship capabilities and their relationship with actual marksmanship capabilities. A novel firearm survey gauged subjective self-evaluations with participants also performing multiple objective shooting tasks. Participants included a community sample, who completed shooting tasks on simulator for safety reasons, and a military sample, who completed live fire exercises. Self-reported opinions sufficiently captured actual marksmanship variability among the community sample, although self-reported opinions did not predict marksmanship abilities among the professional military sample. This discrepancy identifies the relative practical value of using self-reported metrics based on the participant population, but more importantly, it underscores the limited value of professional opinion without some objective marksmanship data to provide a more direct comparison.
Read full abstract