Sports, Exercise and Health Science Sensory on Performance: Full Investigation DESIGN General Aim: Investigate the effects of sensory deprivation on performance D 1 Research Question: What type of shortterm sensory deprivation is most detrimental to a basketball player s ability to shoot from the free throw line? Hypothesis: of the dominant eye will be most detrimental to a basketball player s shooting ability, shown by a decrease in number of baskets scored from the free throw line. D 2 Background Information: All types of sensory deprivation will be detrimental to a player s athletic performance, such as in a basketball game, as the individual has to learn how to compensate for the loss of a sense by learning to rely more on the other senses, which are generally believed to become more defined over time. In this investigation, the shortterm loss of different types of senses will be observed in relation to shooting performance of basketball players from the freethrow line. These types of senses include: peripheral vision, dominant eye vision, nondominant eye vision and touch. A senior school basketball team will be used throughout this investigation, consisting of ablebodied female players, under the age of 18. vision: This is the ability to see outside the direct line of vision, also known as side vision. This will be restricted by the use of goggles, which will have masking tape around the rims to block seeing out of the corner of the eyes. eye vision and nondominant eye vision: Ocular dominance is the preference of seeing out of one eye (the dominant eye), which may be different to the dominant hand. This can be determined by a simple test of looking at a distant stationary object through a circle (provided by the Test Card attached) or even a triangle made by the hands, and bringing the card or hands closer to the face while focusing on the object, until it is in front of one eye, which is the dominant eye. The dominant eye is primarily relied on for precise positional information (Science Daily); mainly responsible for depth perception. The dominant and then the nondominant eye will be covered with a cotton pad using tape when each condition is tested. Touch: The feeling of the ball will be deprived using thick gloves. There will also be a control, which does not include any sensory restrictions on the participants. This gives something to compare the results to, and to see if any variables are affecting the results to cause a decrease of reliability. Sports, exercise and health science teacher support material 1
D 1 Independent variable Types of shortterm sensory deprivation, being a restriction of peripheral vision, dominant eye vision, nondominant eye vision or no touch. D 2 Dependent variable: Number of baskets scored from the free throw line. Controlled variables: Temperature Prior exercise Gender of participants Age of participants Skill level of participants Time of day Same participants used throughout Location (same type of surface and basketball hoops) Same equipment Feedback Speed of shooting Resting time between trials List of All apparatus/equipment to be used: Name of apparatus/equipment Size & degree of error (where appropriate) Stopwatch Basketball Size 6 Goggles Masking tape Tape Cotton pads Test Card Quantity needed 1 2 10 1 1 20 10 2 Method of controlling the controlled variables: Temperature the temperature in the sports hall will be the same as the same airconditioning is available, of around 26 C. Prior exercise participants all will have taken part in the same basketball training of scrimmaging before hand, so may be at similar levels of fatigue. Gender of participants a female basketball team will be used. Age of participants athletes will all be from 13 to 18 years of age, and this will be recorded. Skill level of participants participants are all members of the top basketball team in the college (18 and under girls basketball team) so will be training at the same level, and many may have around the same shooting ability. Time of day the study will be conducted after the participants basketball trainings, which end at 6 p.m. Same participants used throughout the same girls will be used for each testing of variables and repeats. Sports, exercise and health science teacher support material 2
D 2 Location (same type of surface and basketball hoops) The same sports hall will be used, meaning obviously the same hoops will be available and the same polyurethanetype surface will be used. Same equipment the same goggles and gloves will be used for each participant and the basketballs and hoops will be the same throughout the investigation. Feedback external feedback will be given, but internal (kinaesthesis) and visual feedback will be obtained by the participants themselves. Speed of shooting participants will be informed to take as long as they usually take for a free throw shot; no longer than five seconds. Resting time between trials the participants will be given five minutes break between testing a variable. Diagram of setup D 2/3 D 2 D 3 D 2 D 3 Method: 1. The equipment should all be set up (e.g. peripheralrestricting goggles made) and controlled variables should be monitored. Participants should also take the dominant eye test with the Test Card from USA.org (see appendix). 2. For the testing of the first independent variable (refer to Background Information section for these), participants should put on their sense deprivation equipment and make one line of 5 at each of the 2 free throw lines, with a size 6 basketball each. 3. Participants take 10 shots each, taking turns from the free throw line. 4. The participants have 5 minutes break after shooting, in which the number of baskets scored by each player is recorded. This break is timed with the stopwatch. 5. The experiment on the next independent variable is then done, repeating steps 2 to 4. 6. After all the variables have been tested, this whole procedure will be repeated 4 more times, to collect sufficient data. This means steps 2 to 5 are done a total of 5 times. Sports, exercise and health science teacher support material 3
DCP 1 DATA COLLECTION AND PROCESSING Raw Data Table 1.1: Number of Baskets Scored by Each Participant under Each Condition Trial 1 Participant Participant n Sensory 1 4 2 3 2 4 2 4 3 1 3 4 3 6 5 6 4 6 4 5 6 5 3 6 5 4 2 5 4 3 6 5 3 5 3 6 7 6 5 4 5 6 8 7 3 5 3 5 9 8 5 7 3 7 10 4 7 5 3 5 Table 1.2: Number of Baskets Scored by Each Participant under Each Condition Trial 2 Participant n Sensory 1 4 3 5 3 5 2 5 1 3 2 5 3 7 4 4 4 6 4 6 4 5 2 5 5 3 1 3 2 4 6 7 4 6 5 7 7 5 3 5 3 6 8 6 2 4 2 5 9 8 4 7 4 8 10 5 5 6 2 4 Table 1.3: Number of Baskets Scored by Each Participant under Each Condition Trial 3 n Sensory 1 3 3 2 2 4 2 5 4 2 4 5 3 5 6 4 3 5 4 6 6 5 2 5 5 3 3 4 3 4 6 6 4 5 4 7 7 6 4 3 6 6 8 7 4 5 3 6 9 4 6 5 4 8 10 5 6 5 4 4 Sports, exercise and health science teacher support material 4
DCP 1 Table 1.4: Number of Baskets Scored by Each Participant under Each Condition Trial 4 Participant n Sensory 1 5 3 2 2 4 2 5 2 3 2 4 3 5 4 5 4 7 4 6 4 5 4 5 5 4 4 4 3 6 6 5 4 5 2 6 7 6 6 5 4 5 8 6 3 4 4 4 9 7 5 5 4 7 10 3 6 4 3 3 Table 1.5: Number of Baskets Scored by Each Participant under Each Condition Trial 5 Participant n Sensory 1 4 2 3 3 2 2 6 4 4 2 4 3 5 1 5 4 6 4 4 1 3 2 3 5 6 3 2 2 6 6 7 4 4 5 6 7 5 3 5 3 5 8 5 2 3 2 6 9 7 5 4 5 9 10 4 5 4 3 4 Sports, exercise and health science teacher support material 5
DCP 2/3 Processed Data Table 2.1: Mean Values of Number of Baskets Scored, their Standard Deviations and Upper and Lower Boundaries for 95% of Scores for All Conditions n Sensory Mean 5.28 3.78 4.26 3.20 5.26 Standard Deviation 1.27 1.50 1.26 1.02 1.40 2 Standard Deviations 2.53 3.00 2.52 2.04 2.79 Lower Boundary 2.75 0.78 1.74 1.16 2.47 Higher Boundary 7.81 6.78 6.78 5.24 8.05 DCP 2 Sample Calculations To find the mean: e.g. The values are added up and then divided by the number of terms/values. For no peripheral vision: 4+5+7+6+3+7+5+6+8+5+3+5+5+6+3+6+6+7+4+5+5+5+5+6+4+5+6+6+7+3+4+ 6+5+4+6+7+5+5+7+4+4+4+6+5+4+5+6+7+8+4= 264 264 50 = 5.28 To find the standard deviation: This shows us how much the scores vary from the mean, and can be worked out by the formula in Figure 1. This can either be done on a GDC (graph drawing calculator) or Microsoft Excel. e.g. For no peripheral vision: [(each score 5.28)²/(49)] = 1.27 2 standard deviations: The SD multiplied by 2 e.g. 1.27 2 = 2.53 Lower range: Mean 2 standard deviations e.g. 5.28 2.53 = 2.75 Figure 1 Upper range: Mean + 2 standard deviations e.g. 5.28 + 2.53 = 7.81 Sports, exercise and health science teacher support material 6
DCP 3 Graph 2.1: The Mean Number of Baskets Scored under each Condition Average Values for Number of Baskets Scored with Different Types of Sensory Number of Baskets Scored 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 5.28 3.78 4.26 n 3.20 5.26 Sensory Type of Sensory CE 1 Conclusion As shown by Graph 2.1, it seems as though the condition gloves is the most detrimental to the shooting ability of basketball players, as it has the lowest mean score of 3.2 baskets out of 10. If we look at Table 2.1, we can see that the mean of both no peripheral vision and no sensory deprivation are very similar, being 5.28 and 5.26, respectively. The dominant eye covered condition yielded the second lowest average of baskets scored, being 3.78, showing that it is important for shooting (presumably for the reasons mentioned before; it plays a crucial part in depth perception) but is not the most detrimental. Thus, the hypothesis that deprivation of the dominant eye will be most detrimental to a basketball player s shooting ability (shown by a decrease in number of baskets scored from the free throw line) is not supported, as this is the case for the deprivation of touch. The nondominant eye covered condition has a mean of 4.26 baskets scored, which seems significantly more than the dominant eye. The significance of the mean scores for each condition will now be discussed. As can be seen in Table 2.1, the standard deviations are very high. The lower and higher boundaries of the range was calculated, to find what scores the participants would get 95% of the time (see Figure 2). For example, for no peripheral vision, there is a 95% that the players will score between 2.75 and 7.81 baskets (of course realistically this would be between 3 and 8 baskets, seeing as partbaskets can not be scored). This is a very large spread, showing that the results are not very reliable. For the no sensory deprivation conditions, there is a 95% probability that the players score between 2.47 and 8.50 baskets in. These results show that the difference between no peripheral vision and no sensory deprivation is not significant. This Sports, exercise and health science teacher support material 7
CE 1 supports the initial idea that because shooting free throws is a closed skill and it focuses on one point, peripheral vision is not needed. For the dominant and nondominant eyes, the difference is not significant. Only the no dominant eye condition extends to the lower end (of around 0.78), showing that players are slightly more likely to get a lower score without the dominant eye. The players have a 95% probability of getting scores between 1.19 and 5.24 baskets in for the no touch condition, which shows there is a small standard deviations; everyone obtained similar results under this condition. Evaluation Table 3.1: A Table to Show the Experiment s Limitations and their Suggested Improvements Limitation Reliability As shown by the standard deviations (discussed in the section above, and stated in Table 2.1), the results were not reliable, due to the participation of high school basketball players. Their skill levels are relatively similar, but they will not be able to achieve similar performances and obtain the same results each time the experiment is repeated. In contrast professional athletes at the autonomous level would achieve similar performances and thus would be reliable. Further supporting this lack of reliability in the experiment is due to the difference in no peripheral vision and no sensory deprivation ; because peripheral vision is not needed for shooting free throws, the results should be the same as those of no sensory deprivation. The fact that it is not the same immediately indicates the lack of reliability. In addition, the standard deviations are all high, except for the gloves condition. The overwhelming evidence of lack of reliability means that conclusions should be made with caution. Interference of The restriction of touch yielded the lowest standard deviation and mean, as every participant did on average the worst, and scored the lowest amount of baskets. However, an important limitation of this is that this may not be due to the restriction of touch, but the interference of the gloves. The gloves were very thick and bulky, which may have altered how the players had to shoot in order to score. It is crucial that this weakness is recognised, as if this is indeed the case, the gloves condition would not be valid, and then the hypothesis may have actually been supported. Improvement An improvement to help minimise the standard deviations and make the results more reliable could be that the experiment is tested on better players. Ideally professional players would be used, but as this is not realistic, the researcher could conduct it on any players closer to the autonomous level. One improvement would be to use less thick gloves, so the players shooting abilities are not affected negatively. Sports, exercise and health science teacher support material 8
Psychological and Individual Problems Another limitation of the experiment is that the players may have got either better due to practice, or worse due to fatigue. For example, participant 9 scored 9 baskets on the last repeat with no restrictions, showing that she improved with practice, while participant 1 scored 2 with no restrictions. Their individual differences will also determine if they had the motivation to improve their shots or did not care. Psychological differences therefore affect the results, and would have been an issue as the experiment was repeated five times they may have not shot the basketball to the best of their ability each time, if they wanted to finish quickly. These psychological weaknesses are very significant, as because these players are of an associative level, cognitive processes can greatly affect their performance. To improve these psychological and individual problems, the experiment could be conducted over a longer period of time, which may have made the participants take the experiment more seriously, as well as reducing fatigue when shooting. The thought of not having to do so many repeats may have had a positive effect of the players, as they may be motivated by the fun experiment. CE 2 CE 3 CE 1 Bibliography Diagrams Figure 1. Sampling. Mega Links in Criminal Justice. 2008. Austin Peay State University. 10 v. 2008 <http://www.apsu.edu/oconnort/3760/3760lect03.htm> Figure 2. Lesson 8.2. Janet Arnold: Lecturer of Mathematics. 2008. Indiana University Southeast.10 v. 2008 <http://homepages.ius.edu/jakarnol/t 102%20Lesson%208.2%20S%2706.htm> Information Arshinoff, Steve. " Test." Lasik Patient Advocacy Approved Doctors Lasik Surgery Info USAs. 30 Sep. 2004. 6 Oct. 2008 <http://www.usaeyes.org/lasik/faq/lasikmonovisiondominanteye.htm>. " eye in vision." Science Daily: News & Articles in Science, Health, Environment & Technology. 6 Oct. 2008 <http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/o/ocular_dominance.htm>. Sports, exercise and health science teacher support material 9
Appendix D 3 Reproduced by permission of USAs, http://www.usas.org Sports, exercise and health science teacher support material 10