Designing representative task constraints for studying visual anticipation in fast ball sports : what we can learn from past and contemporary insights in neurobiology and psychology

Abstract

In their target article, Van der Kamp and colleagues provided a thought-provoking critique of the extant literature on visual anticipation in fast ball sports, arguing how researchers in this area have failed to adequately capture the potential of Milner and Goodale’s (1995) two visual systems model for explaining perception of information for decision making, planning and acting. There has only been limited recognition in the literature that the model has some potential to explain perceptual processes involved in picking up information prior to ball flight for use in supporting (interceptive) actions. Van der Kamp, Rivas, van Doorn and Savelsbergh (2008) argued that a major reason for this inadequacy is because an ‘encompassing explanation’ for the involvement of two visual systems in visual anticipation and action has not been forthcoming. In this commentary, it is observed how such an endeavour in sport psychology would form a challenging task requiring a multi-disciplinary approach from researchers. Discussion then focuses on current understanding from a range of related scientific disciplines that might inform such an approach, including biology, the neurosciences and psychology. Van der Kamp and colleagues highlighted the potential role of ecological psychology in providing some of the conceptualisation necessary for re-designing experimental tasks in research on visual anticipation in sport. Their call for experimental re-design is echoed in this commentary with reference to past and contemporary ideas in psychology (especially insights of Gibson (1979) and Brunswik (1956)), coordination dynamics and the behavioural neurosciences.