↓ Skip to main content

A functional approach to movement analysis and error identification in sports and physical education

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A functional approach to movement analysis and error identification in sports and physical education
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01339
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ernst-Joachim Hossner, Frank Schiebl, Ulrich Göhner

Abstract

In a hypothesis-and-theory paper, a functional approach to movement analysis in sports is introduced. In this approach, contrary to classical concepts, it is not anymore the "ideal" movement of elite athletes that is taken as a template for the movements produced by learners. Instead, movements are understood as the means to solve given tasks that in turn, are defined by to-be-achieved task goals. A functional analysis comprises the steps of (1) recognizing constraints that define the functional structure, (2) identifying sub-actions that subserve the achievement of structure-dependent goals, (3) explicating modalities as specifics of the movement execution, and (4) assigning functions to actions, sub-actions and modalities. Regarding motor-control theory, a functional approach can be linked to a dynamical-system framework of behavioral shaping, to cognitive models of modular effect-related motor control as well as to explicit concepts of goal setting and goal achievement. Finally, it is shown that a functional approach is of particular help for sports practice in the context of structuring part practice, recognizing functionally equivalent task solutions, finding innovative technique alternatives, distinguishing errors from style, and identifying root causes of movement errors.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 75 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Researcher 7 9%
Other 4 5%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 22 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 25 33%
Neuroscience 8 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Psychology 4 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 25 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 December 2016.
All research outputs
#2,396,888
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,656
of 29,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,029
of 267,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#93
of 551 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,801 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,234 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 551 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.