The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Anticipation in squash: Differences in advance cue utilization between expert and novice players
Abstract
The time of occurrence and spatial location of the advance cues used to anticipate the direction and force of an opponent's stroke in squash were examined using a film task. This task, designed to stimulate the normal perceptual display of the defensive player, consisted of two discrete parts, each containing 160 individual stroke sequences (trials). In the first part of the film task, the display was occluded at different time intervals throughout the development of the opponent's stroke and the 16 expert and 20 novice subjects had to predict both the direction (down-wall or cross-court) and force (drive or drop shot) of the opponent's stroke. In the second part of the film task, visibility to selected advance cues was occluded by placing opaque mats on the film surface. Across all of the film task conditions experts were superior to novices in predicting the event outcome from the information available, highlighting the important contribution anticipatory skills make to expert performance in this sport. Analysis of lateral (direction) error showed that the most critical time periods for extracting information about stroke direction are the periods between 160-80 ms prior to racket-ball contact and the period of extended ball flight arising at least 80 ms after contact. Whereas both groups were attuned to this ball flight information, only the experts were capable of picking up information from the early part of the opponent's actions. This early information appeared to be provided by the opposing player's arm action. Similar time periods were found to be also important for the prediction of stroke depth, but in this case both experts and novices were similar in their cue dependence.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231 · Cited by 11,317
Cited by
Perceptual-Cognitive Expertise in Sport: A Meta-Analysis
Mann, D. T. Y., Williams, A. M., Ward, P., & Janelle, C. M. (2007) · Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology · doi:10.1123/jsep.29.4.457 · Cited by 1,425
Practice and Play in the Development of Sport Expertise
Côté, J., Baker, J., & Abernethy, B. (2007) · Handbook of Sport Psychology · doi:10.1002/9781118270011.ch8 · Cited by 767
Self-citationAdvances in the application of information technology to sport performance
Liebermann, D. G., Katz, L., Hughes, M. D., Bartlett, R. M., McClements, J., & Franks, I. M. (2002) · Journal of Sports Sciences · doi:10.1080/026404102320675611 · Cited by 338
Anticipation skill and susceptibility to deceptive movement
Jackson, R. C., Warren, S., & Abernethy, B. (2006) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.02.002 · Cited by 268
Self-citationMeasurement of cognitive functions in experts and elite athletes: A meta‐analytic review
Scharfen, H., & Memmert, D. (2019) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3526 · Cited by 257
Metadata
- Authors
- Abernethy, B.
- Venue
- Journal of Sports Sciences
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1990-03
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 17-34
- ISSN
- 0264-0414 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-447X
- OpenAlex
- W2009953153
- Cited by
- 250
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 1.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Anticipation in squash: Differences in advance cue utilization between expert and novice players. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/02640419008732128
- The paper
- Abernethy, B. (1990). Anticipation in squash: Differences in advance cue utilization between expert and novice players. Journal of Sports Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640419008732128
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.