Table 1.
Soccer experience of the participant groups.
Figure 1.
Accuracy in predicting the direction of the ball in normal and deceptive full colour soccer video clips in HS and LS players.
Chance accuracy is 50%. The x-axis shows the temporal cut-off of the soccer video. Squares represent normal moves and triangles represent deceptive moves. Black symbols indicate HS players, and grey symbols LS players. Error bars are ± 1 SEM.
Figure 2.
Accuracy in predicting the direction of the ball in normal and deceptive point-light soccer video clips in HS and LS players.
Chance accuracy is 50%. The x-axis shows the temporal cut-off of the soccer video. Squares represent normal moves and triangles deceptive moves. Black symbols indicate HS players, and grey symbols LS players. Error bars are ± 1 SEM.
Table 2.
ANOVA results for experiment 1.
Table 3.
Accuracy of direction prediction compared with chance performance: entries in bold represent performance significantly below chance.
Figure 3.
Stimulus sequence for a single trial of Experiment 2.
Figure 4.
Cueing RT (incongruent minus congruent RT) is shown as a function of temporal occlusion for two types of cueing stimulus (normal and deceptive football moves) and two groups of participants (HS and LS).
Regression lines were fitted to mean data by a least squares method (normal, solid line and deceptive, dashed line). One-sample t-tests show, for normal and deceptive moves, at which occlusion levels the mean cueing RT (across all participants) is significantly different from zero at p<.05 *, p<.01 **. Error bars are ± 1 SEM.