Efficacy of a Virtual Environment for Training Ball Passing Skills in Rugby

Miles, Helen Cabot; Pop, Serban R.; Watt, Simon J.; Lawrence, Gavin P.; John, Nigel W.; Perrot, Vincent; Mallet, Pierre; Mestre, Daniel; Morgan, Kenton

doi:10.1007/978-3-662-43790-2_6

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such an immersive environment has the potential to offer a more realistic experience (enabling more natural displacements and large display of the environment). Similar results were presented also in smaller LSID presented in [Miles et al 2014], where participants did not estimate correctly target distances in a rugby simulator. However, the evaluation was based on a small number of users (three) and the authors considered just the exposure to 1PP.…”

Section: Throwing Performance In the Three Visual Conditionssupporting

confidence: 90%

Third person view and guidance for more natural motor behaviour in immersive basketball playing

Covaci¹,

Olivier²,

Multon³

2014

Proceedings of the 20th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of Virtual Reality (VR) in sports training is now widely studied with the perspective to transfer motor skills learned in virtual environments (VEs) to real practice. However precision motor tasks that require high accuracy have been rarely studied in the context of VE, especially in Large Screen Image Display (LSID) platforms. An example of such a motor task is the basketball free throw, where the player has to throw a ball in a 46cm wide basket placed at 4.2m away from her. In order to determine the best VE training conditions for this type of skill, we proposed and compared three training paradigms. These training conditions were used to compare the combinations of different user perspectives: first (1PP) and third-person (3PP) perspectives, and the effectiveness of visual guidance. We analysed the performance of eleven amateur subjects who performed series of free throws in a real and immersive 1:1 scale environment under the proposed conditions. The results show that ball speed at the moment of the release in 1PP was significantly lower compared to real world, supporting the hypothesis that distance is underestimated in large screen VEs. However ball speed in 3PP condition was more similar to the real condition, especially if combined with guidance feedback. Moreover, when guidance information was proposed, the subjects released the ball at higher -and closer to optimal -position (5-7% higher compared to no-guidance conditions). This type of information contributes to better understand the impact of visual feedback on the motor performance of users who wish to train motor skills using immersive environments. Moreover, this information can be used by exergames designers who wish to develop coaching systems to transfer motor skills learned in VEs to real practice.

show abstract

Section: Throwing Performance In the Three Visual Conditionssupporting

confidence: 90%

Third person view and guidance for more natural motor behaviour in immersive basketball playing

Covaci¹,

Olivier²,

Multon³

2014

Proceedings of the 20th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results we report here are in accordance with previous work, 5 stating that users underestimate egocentric distance in an LSID VE. Similar results were also reported for smaller LSIDs, 6 where participants did not correctly estimate target distances in a rugby simulator. However, that evaluation was based on a small number of users (three), and the authors only considered the 1PP condition.…”

Section: Comparing User Performancesupporting

confidence: 83%

“…Researchers have shown that 1PP is often preferred in navigation tasks, whereas 3PP is more suitable for tasks that need global knowledge. 6 In ball-catching tasks, the same authors showed that 3PP leads to a better evaluation of distance than other displays when using a head-mounted display (HMD). Several questions remain open: How does changing the visual perspective influence the distance perception in LSIDs?…”

Section: Virtual Reality Software and Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual Perspective and Feedback Guidance for VR Free-Throw Training

Covaci¹,

Olivier²,

Multon³

2015

IEEE Comput. Grap. Appl.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate distance perception and natural interactions are mandatory conditions when training precision aiming tasks in VR. However, many factors specific to virtual environments (VEs) lead to differences in the way users execute a motor task in VR versus the real world. To investigate these differences, the authors performed a study on basketball beginners' free-throw performance in VEs under different visual conditions. Although the success rate is not statistically different, some adaptations occurred in the way the users performed the task, depending on the visual conditions. In the third-person perspective visual condition, the release parameters indicate that the users more accurately estimated distance to target. Adding visual guidance information (gradual depth information showing the ideal ball trajectory) also led to more natural motor behavior. The final aim of this study was to develop a reliable basketball free-throw training system in VEs, so the authors compared beginners' performances in VR with experts' models of performance. Their results show that most of the performance variables tended to evolve closer to the experts' performance during the training in the VE.

show abstract

“…Covaci, Olivier & Multon, 2015a,b), to analyze distance estimation (e.g. Miles et al, 2014) and to investigate different forms of feedback (e.g. Sigrist et al, 2015).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Several Types of Virtual Characters in Sports - a Literature Survey

Petri

Bandow

Witte

2018

International Journal of Computer Science in Sport

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses the development and application of virtual environments (VEs) in the domain of exercise as well as research in recreational and high-performance sports. A special focus is put on the use of virtual characters (VCs). For its elaboration, the following criteria parameters were chosen: scene content and the role of the VC, output device, kind of additional feedback, level of expertise of the tested participants, kind of user’s movement (reaction), kind of the visualization of the user’s body, kind of study and kind of evaluation. We explored the role of VCs embodying virtual opponents, teammates, or coaches in sports. We divided these VCs in passive and autonomous characters. Passive VCs are not affected by the user, whereas autonomous VCs adapt autonomously to the user’s movements and positions. We identified 44 sport related VEs, thereof 22 each in the domain of recreational sports and high-performance sports: of the identified 44 VEs, 19 VEs are without VC, 20 VEs with passive VCs, and 5 VEs with autonomous VCs. We categorized studies examining expert athletes in high-performance sports as well as studies analyzing novices, beginners or advanced athletes in recreational sports. Nevertheless, all identified systems are suitable for athletes of recreational and high-performance level

show abstract

Efficacy of a Virtual Environment for Training Ball Passing Skills in Rugby

Cited by 8 publications

References 39 publications

Third person view and guidance for more natural motor behaviour in immersive basketball playing

Third person view and guidance for more natural motor behaviour in immersive basketball playing

Visual Perspective and Feedback Guidance for VR Free-Throw Training

Using Several Types of Virtual Characters in Sports - a Literature Survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About