Central European Journal of Sport Sciences and Medicine

ISSN: 2300-9705     eISSN: 2353-2807    OAI    DOI: 10.18276/cej.2016.1-02
CC BY-SA   Open Access   DOAJ  DOAJ

Lista wydań / Vol. 13, No. 1/2016
Short Communication: The Role of Different Body-Related Visual Cues in Synchronized Trampolining

Autorzy: Natalie Czogalla
University of Hildesheim, Institute of Sport Science, Hildesheim, Germany

Thomas Heinen
University of Hildesheim, Institute of Sport Science, Hildesheim, Germany
Słowa kluczowe: trampoline gymnastics visual perception
Rok wydania:2016
Liczba stron:7 (15-21)
Cited-by (Crossref) ?:


Visual information is thought to be a dominant information source when performing whole-body movements in gymnastics. Visual information can furthermore facilitate performance when being engaged in situations of interpersonal coordination that may occur in sports such as synchronized trampolining. The question arises, which body-related visual cues are most important in the emergence of behavioral synchronization between two gymnasts in synchronized trampolining? To address this question, advanced gymnasts were asked to synchronize their performance to video-sequences of a model gymnast, while body-related visual cues of the model gymnast were systematically manipulated. Results revealed, first that biological motion cues are more important than nonbiological motion cues, and second that the perceived motion of the arms seems to drive synchronicity in synchronized trampolining. It is stated, that biological visual information of the arms is a dominant visual information source when performing leaps in synchronized trampolining.
Pobierz plik

Plik artykułu


1.Abernethy, B., Wann, J., Parks, S. (1998). Training perceptual-motor skills for sport. In: B. Elliott (ed.), Training in sport. Applying sport science (pp. 1–68). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
2.Blake, R., Shiffrar, M. (2007). Perception of human motion. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 47–73.
3.Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.Enoka, R.M. (2002). Neuromechanics of human movement (3rd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
5.Freeman, S. (2007). Trampolining. London, UK: A & C Black Publishers.
6.Heinen, T. (2011). Evidence for the spotting hypothesis in gymnastics. Motor Control, 15 (2), 267–284.
7.Heinen, T., Koschnick, J., Schmidt-Maaß, D., Vinken, P.M. (2014). Gymnasts utilize visual and auditory information for behavioral synchronization in trampolining. Biology of Sport, 31 (3), 223–226.
8.Hondzinski, J.M., Darling, W.G. (2001). Aerial somersault performance under three visual conditions. Motor Control, 5 (3), 281–300.
9.Kelly, J. (2014). Over & above: trampoline gymnastics towards world class performance. Oxford, UK: Meyer & Meyer Sports.
10.Luis, M., Tremblay, L. (2008). Visual feedback use during a back tuck somersault: evidence for optimal visual feedback utilization. Motor Control, 12 (3), 210–218.
11.Magill, R.A. (2007). Motor learning and control. Concepts and applications. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
12.Mann, D.T.Y., Williams, A.M., Ward, P., Janelle, C.M. (2007). Perceptual-cognitive expertise in sport: a meta-analysis. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 29 (4), 457–478.
13.Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9 (2), 129–154.
14.Raab, M., de Oliveira, R.F., Heinen, T. (2009). How do people perceive and generate options? In: M. Raab, H. Hekeren, J.G. Johnson (Eds.), Progress in brain research: Vol. 174. mind and motion: The bidirectional link between thought and action (pp. 49–59). Amsterdam, NL: Elsevier.
15.Richardson, M.J., Marsh, K.L., Isenhower, R.W., Goodman, J.R.L., Schmidt, R.C. (2007). Rocking together: dynamics of intentional and unintentional interpersonal coordination. Human Movement Science, 26 (6), 867–891.
16.Schmidt, R.C., Fitzpatrick, P., Caron, R., Mergeche, J. (2010). Understanding social motor coordination. Human Movement Science, 30 (5), 834–845.
17.Schmidt, R.C., Turvey, M.T. (1994). Phase-entrainment dynamics of visually coupled rhythmic movements. Biological Cybernetics, 70 (4), 369–376.
18.Sebanz, N., Knoblich, G. (2009). Prediction in joint action: what, when, and where. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 353–367.
19.Vesper, C., van der Wel, R.P.R.D., Knoblich, G., Sebanz, N. (2013). Are you ready to jump? Predictive mechanisms in interpersonal coordination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 39 (1), 48–61.
20.Vickers, J.N. (2007). Perception, cognition, and decision training. The quiet eye in action. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
21.Warren, W.H. (2006). The dynamics of perception and action. Psychological Review, 113 (2), 358–389.
22.Withagen, R., Michaels, C.F. (2005). The role of feedback information for calibration and attunement in perceiving length by dynamic touch. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 31 (6), 1379–1390.