From attentional control to attentional spillover: A skill-level investigation of attention, movement, and performance outcomes

Beilock, Sian L.; Gray, Rob

doi:10.1016/j.humov.2012.02.014

Cited by 94 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A large body of dual-task research has examined the effect of skill-focused and extraneous focus secondary tasks on primary task performance across skill levels (e.g., Beilock, Bertenthal, McCoy, & Carr, 2004;Beilock & Carr, 2001;Beilock & Gray, 2012;Castaneda & Gray, 2007;Gray, 2004;Suss & Ward, 2010). These studies have helped clarify the mode of attention most beneficial for successful primary task performance based on current skill level.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A variation of previously used dual-task methodology for attentional focus (Beilock & Gray, 2012;Castaneda & Gray 2007, Gray, 2004 was used for the present study and modified for handgun shooting following Suss and Ward (2010). Specifically, participants were required to complete a draw-shoot-holster task.…”

Section: Protocolmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In general, these studies have demonstrated that an extraneous focus of attention is superior to skill-focused attention for both the performance and learning of experts (Castaneda &Gray, 2007;Gray, 2004); whereas, skill-focused attention has shown to be superior to an extraneous focus of attention for novices (Beilock, Bertenthal, McCoy, & Carr, 2004;Beilock & Gray, 2012). Researchers using a dual-task methodology (Beilock & Carr, 2001;Beilock, Bertenthal, McCoy, & Carr, 2004;Gray, 2004) can then assess adherence to a secondary task, and the accuracy with which it is performed, by examining secondary task performance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Attention, workload, and performance: A dual-task simulated shooting study

Diekfuss

Ward

Raisbeck

2016

International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Protocolmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Attention, workload, and performance: A dual-task simulated shooting study

Diekfuss

Ward

Raisbeck

2016

International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Flegal and Anderson (2008) Their thought is that at a certain level of skill, teaching actually undermines skilful performance; meaning that those who teach can't do. There is also evidence suggesting that the more a skill is proceduralised, the less an agent is able to describe or remember their performances (Keele and Summers 1976, Brown and Carr 1989, Beilock and Gray 2012). If we think that the ability to describe-or at least decompose-one's own performance is an important part of being a successful teacher, this suggests that being highly skilled at doing also presents a barrier to teaching.…”

Section: Generative Teachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowing-how, showing, and epistemic norms

Habgood‐Coote

2017

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms KNA: It is permissible to assert that p, only if one knows that p. 1 This norm says that an agent's assertion is permissible only if she knows what she says. If a speaker says that something which is false, unjustified or not known, then there is something inappropriate about that assertion. Crucially, KNA makes a claim about epistemic permission: an ignorant or false assertion can still be morally or prudentially 1 The knowledge-norm of assertion is formulated in several different ways: as an imperative or must claim (Williamson 2000: 241-3), as a claim about appropriateness (Brown 2008a), or as a claim about permissibility (Turri 2011: 37). There is also debate about whether the norm should also encompass the sufficiency claim (Brown 2008a(Brown , 2008b(Brown , 2010(Brown , 2012). I will not consider these issues since the counterexamples to the knowledge-norm of showing concern the necessity of know-how for appropriate showing, and will cause problems to any of these formulations.2 permissible, and a knowledgeable assertion can still be morally or prudentially impermissible. 2 Buckwalter and Turri (henceforth B&T) have recently opened up a parallel question about the epistemic permissibility of showing, claiming that 'just as knowledgethat is the norm of telling, so knowledge-how is the norm of showing ' (2014: 17). This is an important proposal, which if correct would offer insight into the normative significance of knowledge-how, deepen and widen the debate about epistemic norms, and give us a picture of the commonalities between knowledge-how and knowledge-that.Although they don't offer a formulation of this norm, the parallel norm to KNA would be a knowledge-how norm of showing, which we'll call KNS for short: KNS: It is permissible to show someone how to V, only if one knows how to V. intentional showing. In a case in which A secretly watches B make a tomato rose without B's knowledge we can say that B showed A how to make a tomato rose (Hawley 2010: 402), but I take it that this is not the sense of 'showing' that figures in KNS. 4 Moreover, KNS only concerns showing-how, and not the kind of activity that is involved in showing 2 From this point on, I will use unqualified claims about permissibility to refer to epistemic permission. 3 Although KNS is only significant if it is possible to show without having know-how. This is a point we will return to in §3.3. 4 The fact that I focus on cases in which one person learns from another's teaching should not distract us from the fact that we can also acquire know-how through imitation, practice, and simple trial and error. Since our focus will be on the norms on interpersonal teaching, giving a full account of the ways in which we can acquire know-how is beyond the scope of this paper. Thanks to an anonymous reviewer for rai...

show abstract

“…The common assumption is that performance is enhanced when automated and relegated to subpersonal (non-conscious) processes and mechanisms and impaired when the reverse occurs (this is contested below). To their credit, SFTs show that novice and expert failure dynamics depend on different underlying cognitive structures, with notable differences between how they process information, memory, and attention (Beilock and Carr 2001;Beilock and Gray 2012). That is, novices and experts choke for different reasons and in different ways and contexts.…”

Section: Overview Of Empirical Research and Theoretical Accounts On Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

From clumsy failure to skillful fluency: a phenomenological analysis of and Eastern solution to sport’s choking effect

Ilundáin-Agurruza

2015

Phenom Cogn Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Excellent performance in sport involves specialized and refined skills within very narrow applications. Choking throws a wrench in the works of finely tuned performances. Functionally, and reduced to its simplest expression, choking is severe underperformance when engaging already mastered skills. Choking is a complex phenomenon with many intersecting facets: its dysfunctions result from the multifaceted interaction of cognitive and psychological processes, neurophysiological mechanisms, and phenomenological dynamics. This article develops a phenomenological model that, complementing empirical and theoretical research, helps understand and redress choking. It aims at describing the experience of choking as experience, and to discuss strategies to palliate or prevent its onset at the pragmatic level at which athletes engage the phenomenon experientially. An overview of current empirical research and theoretical models highlights key ideas and points out contentious issues. The model describes the common structure of the choking experience. It identifies four core constitutive elements: A) disruptive proprioceptive and kinesthetic dynamics, B) a malfunctioning background or Jamesian fringe of consciousness, C) dislocated time dynamics, and D) emotional disturbances. The novelty of the remedy is that it is designed to cross disciplinary boundaries between phenomenology, historiography, and hermeneutics, and moreover connects theory to praxis as it looks at Japanese dō (道), practices of self-cultivation. It focuses on actual do-or-die situations, not putative ones such as important business deals or competing for a medal. To this effect, it examines medieval Japanese swordsmanship and training manuals and also engages risk sports, where death is indeed a real possibility. The manuals, which arise in the context of chokeinducing life or death duels, and risk sports, afford keen phenomenological observations and practical advice that prove invaluable for today's sports world and beyond.

show abstract

From attentional control to attentional spillover: A skill-level investigation of attention, movement, and performance outcomes

Cited by 94 publications

References 30 publications

Attention, workload, and performance: A dual-task simulated shooting study

Attention, workload, and performance: A dual-task simulated shooting study

Knowing-how, showing, and epistemic norms

From clumsy failure to skillful fluency: a phenomenological analysis of and Eastern solution to sport’s choking effect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About