Examining Perceptual Differences Amongst Elite, Intermediate, and Novice Ice Hockey Referees: Visual Attention and Eye Movement Recordings

Abstract

Perceptual-cognitive skills are important characteristics for sport participants, which have been shown to contribute to the expert advantage (Abernethy, Baker & Côté, 2005; Mann, Williams, Ward, & Janelle, 2004; McPherson, 2000). One such skill is visual attention, which is beneficial for athletes, but less commonly researched for sport officials. For this dissertation, three data collection procedures assisted in examining the visual behaviors of elite, intermediate and novice ice hockey referees. In phase one, 2 elite, 2 intermediate, and 2 novice referees wore helmet cameras for one game and subsequently participated in stimulated recall interviews to address visual behaviors that occurred during that game. The four resultant themes that emerged were: Divided Attention, Selective Attention, Positioning and Context, and Influences of Visual Attention. Within each of these major themes there were several similarities and differences amongst the referees. In phase two, 2 elite, 2 intermediate, and 2 novice focus groups watched one elite and one intermediate helmet camera videotape and discussed what they thought the referee was attending to and where they would direct their visual attention. The focus group transcripts were deductively coded to search for potential differences between the elite and intermediate referees based on the themes identified in phase one. It was evident that the elite referee was superior to the intermediate in several areas including: Maintaining a focus on the majority of players, knowing when to focus away from the puck, having better post-whistle attention, and being better positioned. Discussion related to how these advantages might be gained by learning through experience. For phase three, 10 elite, 10 intermediate, and 10 novice referees wore an eye-tracking device and made penalty decisions on ice hockey infractions presented on a computer screen. In this experiment, decision accuracy, decision type, number of fixations, and fixation duration were calculated. MANOVA results indicated that there were no significant differences across participant groups. The global discussion includes data excluded from the three main papers, alternative methods for further interpretation of the results, integration of the results of the three papers, and proposals for future research.