Advertisement

Psychological Research

, Volume 83, Issue 5, pp 924–934 | Cite as

Response requirements affect offside judgments in football (soccer)

  • Frowin FasoldEmail author
  • Peter Wühr
  • Daniel Memmert
Original Article
  • 140 Downloads

Abstract

Judging offside in football represents a typical go–nogo task (offside—raising the flag, no offside—no response). Nevertheless, several studies involved two-choice tasks (e.g. offside—press key A, no offside—press key B) to investigate potential sources of errors in offside situations. While go–nogo and choice–response tasks are commonly used in experimental psychology, response preferences may differ between the two tasks. Therefore, we investigated the impact of response requirements on offside judgments in a sample of male participants without experience in professional refereeing. Each participant judged displays of potential offside situations in a go–nogo condition and in a two-choice condition. The results show that response requirements affected the response bias of the participants and suggest that go–nogo requirements increase the preference for the positive response (i.e. the offside response) as compared to the two-choice task. We discuss both methodological and theoretical implications of this finding.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Lukas Stellmach for collecting parts of the data.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The procedure performed in the presented study was in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional committee (the ethics committee of the German Sport University approved conduction of this study) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Baldo, M. V. C., Ranvaud, R. D., & Morya, E. (2002). Flag errors in soccer games: The flash-lag effect brought to real life. Perception, 31(10), 1205–1210. doi: 10.1068/p3422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barte, J. C. M., & Oudejan, R. R. D. (2012). The effects of additional lines on a football field on assistant referees positioning and offside judgments. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 7, 481–492. doi: 10.1260/1747-9541.7.3.481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Belda Meruenda, F. (2004). Can the human eye detect an offside position during a football match? British Medical Journal, 329, 1470–1472. doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7480.1470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blurton, S. P., Greenlee, M. W., & Gondan, M. (2014). Multisensory processing of redundant information in go/no-go and choice responses. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 76, 1212–1233. doi: 10.3758/s13414-014-0644-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Catteeuw, P., Gilis, B., García-Aranda, J.-M., Tresaco, F., Wagemans, J., & Helsen, W. (2010a). Offside decision making in the 2002 and 2006 FIFA World Cups. Journal of Sports Siences, 10, 1027–1032. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2010.491084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Catteeuw, P., Gilis, B., Wagemans, J., & Helsen, W. (2010b). Perceptual-cognitive skills in offside decision making: Expertise and training effects. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 32(6), 828–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Catteeuw, P., Gilis, B., Wagemans, J., & Helsen, W. (2010c). Offside decision making of assistant referees in the English Premier League: Impact of physical and perceptual-cognitive factors on match performance. Journal of Sport Sciences, 5, 471–481. doi: 10.1080/02640410903518184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Catteeuw, P., Helsen, W., Gilis, B., Van Roie, E., & Wagemans, J. (2009). Visual scan patterns and decision-making skills of expert assistant referees in offside situations. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 31, 786–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chiarello, C., Nuding, S., & Pollock, A. (1988). Lexical decision and naming asymmetries: Influence of response selection and response bias. Brain and Language, 34, 302–314. doi: 10.1016/0093-934X(88)90141-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Donders, F. C. (1969). On the speed of mental processes. Acta Psychologica, 30, 412–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gilis, B., Helsen, W., Catteeuw, P., Roie, E. V., & Wagemans, J. (2009). Interpretation and application of the offside law by expert assistant referees: Perception of spatial positions in complex dynamic events on and off the field. Journal of Sport Sciences, 6, 551–563. doi: 10.1080/02640410802702178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gilis, B., Helsen, W., Catteeuw, P., & Wagemans, J. (2008). Offside decisions by expert assistant referees in association football: Perception and recall of spatial positions in complex dynamic events. Journal of experimental psychology Applied, 14, 21–35. doi: 10.1037/1076-898X.14.1.2121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gomez, P., Ratcliff, R., & Perea, M. (2007). A model of the go/no-go task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 389–413. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gordon, B., & Caramazza, A. (1982). Lexical decision for open- and closed-class words: Failure to replicate differential frequency sensitivity. Brain and Language, 15, 143–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Helsen, W., Gilis, B., & Weston, M. (2006). Errors in judging “offside” in association football: Test of the optical error versus the perceptual flash-lag hypothesis. Journal of Sport Sciences, 24(5), 521–528. doi: 10.1080/02640410500298065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. IFAB. (2017). Laws of the game 2017/2018. Zurich, Switzerland: The International Football Association Board. Rules and booklet can be retrieved from: http://static-3eb8.kxcdn.com/documents/274/092646_180517_LotG_17_18_FINAL_EN.pdf.
  18. Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863. (article 863).
  19. Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (2005). Detection theory: A user’s guide. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  20. Mallo, J., Frutos, P. G., Juárez, D., & Navarro, E. (2012). Effect of positioning on the accuracy of decision making of association football top-class referees and assistant referees during competitive matches. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30(13), 1437–1445. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2012.711485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Measso, G., & Zaidel, E. (1990). Effect of response programming on hemispheric differences in lexical decision. Neuropsychologia, 28, 635–646. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932%2890%2990118-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Müsseler, J., Stork, S., & Kerzel, D. (2002). Comparing mislocalizations with moving stimuli: The Fröhlich effect, the flash-lag, and representational momentum. Visual Cognition, 9, 120–138. doi: 10.1080/13506280143000359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Oudejans, R. R. D., Bakker, F. C., Verheijen, R., Gerrits, J. C., Steinbruckner, M., & Beek, P. J. (2005). How position and motion of expert assistant referees in soccer relate to the quality of their offside judgements during actual match play. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 36(1), 3–21.Google Scholar
  24. Oudejans, R. D. R., Verheijen, R., Bakker, F. C., Gerrits, J. C., Steinbrückner, M., & Beek, J. B. (2000). Errors in judging offside in football. Nature, 404, 33. doi: 10.1038/35003639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Perea, M., Rosa, E., & Gomez, C. (2002). Is the go/no-go lexical decision task an alternative to the yes/no lexical decision task? Memory & Cognition, 30, 34–45. doi: 10.3758/BF03195263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Put, K., Wagemans, J., Jaspers, A., & Helsen, W. (2013). Web-based training improves on-field offside decision-making performance. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14, 577–585. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.03.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ratcliff, R., & Rouder, J. N. (1998). Modeling response times for decisions between two choices. Psychological Science, 9, 347–356. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user‘s guide. University of Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.Google Scholar
  29. Wühr, P., Fasold, F., & Memmert, D. (2015). Soccer offside judgments in laypersons with different types of static displays. PLoS One, 10(8), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Training Science and Sport InformaticsGerman Sport University CologneCologneGermany
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyTU Dortmund UniversityDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations