↓ Skip to main content

Domain-Specific and Unspecific Reaction Times in Experienced Team Handball Goalkeepers and Novices

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 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
Domain-Specific and Unspecific Reaction Times in Experienced Team Handball Goalkeepers and Novices
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00882
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fabian Helm, Mathias Reiser, Jörn Munzert

Abstract

In our everyday environments, we are constantly having to adapt our behavior to changing conditions. Hence, processing information is a fundamental cognitive activity, especially the linking together of perceptual and action processes. In this context, expertise research in the sport domain has concentrated on arguing that superior processing performance is driven by an advantage to be found in anticipatory processes (see Williams et al., 2011, for a review). This has resulted in less attention being paid to the benefits coming from basic internal perceptual-motor processing. In general, research on reaction time (RT) indicates that practicing a RT task leads to an increase in processing speed (Mowbray and Rhoades, 1959; Rabbitt and Banerji, 1989). Against this background, the present study examined whether the speed of internal processing is dependent on or independent from domain-specific motor expertise in unpredictable stimulus-response tasks and in a double stimulus-response paradigm. Thirty male participants (15 team handball goalkeepers and 15 novices) performed domain-unspecific simple or choice stimulus-response (CSR) tasks as well as CSR tasks that were domain-specific only for goalkeepers. As expected, results showed significantly faster RTs for goalkeepers on domain-specific tasks, whereas novices' RTs were more frequently excessively long. However, differences between groups in the double stimulus-response paradigm were not significant. It is concluded that the reported expertise advantage might be due to recalling stored perceptual-motor representations for the domain-specific tasks, implying that experience with (practice of) a motor task explicitly enhances the internal processing of other related domain-specific tasks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 79 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 16%
Student > Bachelor 12 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Professor 5 6%
Other 17 21%
Unknown 21 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 28 34%
Psychology 9 11%
Neuroscience 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 23 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 December 2021.
All research outputs
#12,620,863
of 22,785,242 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,230
of 29,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,954
of 352,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#203
of 401 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,785,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,698 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 352,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 401 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.