Intervention In Regulation

Joseph Spano Applied Vision Research: Single Case Study Abstract Vision is important in any sport yet, the level of exactness and detail is much more important in baseball. This study looks into an applied approach to vision training of baseball batters. The aims of the study are to see if there was an increase in correct recognition of the ball and, at the same time, if their reaction time decreased. This was tested by using two sets of baseballs during batting practice. Each week the session started with 25 pitches to get a baseline with a pitching machine, and the speed was set at 65 miles per hours (mph). Then the intervention was implemented, followed by a final 25 pitch baseline with the machine again. The speed was, once again, set at 65 mph. The intervention used the two regulation baseballs with the letters A,B,C,H on one baseball and J,K,M,O on the other. A basic pitching wind-up was used and the throw stopped at the release point. This method was used for only ten trials. Next, baseballs with colored stripes (red, green, and blue) were pitched from 51 feet at three-quarters speed. The batter watched ten pitches and called out the color as soon as they could recognize it. This was repeated another 20 times with the batter still calling out the colors as well as swinging at the pitches. After the seven week intervention, there was no significant change in baseline scores, but color recognition reaction time did decrease. There is a significant negative correlation in correct recognition and reaction times. Continued research should be done in more detail with experimental and control groups. The paper also discusses the possibility of a learning effect versus an actual improvement. Based on the trials the latter appears to be the case. It also discusses the implications of improving dual task abilities by having to call out the proper color and hit the ball. Introduction A common myth in hitting is that it is a singular task while in truth it is a dual task. Your eyes are your guidance system, therefore seeing the ball is arguably the most important aspect of hitting. Based on research, hitting involves pitch recognition and the actual swing. These are two separate processes that need to work together to be successful and minimize error in the batter’s box. Despite this fact, little attention has been paid to vision. Hitting a baseball includes attentional skills, expectations, perception of the ball and the actual swing. “The aims were threefold: (a) to compare the relative effects of attending to extraneous information and attending to skill execution on simulated baseball batting performance, (b) to compare how these effects differed as a function of expertise, and (c) to examine the effect of attentional focus on the kinematics of batting movements” (Gray, 2004). It was shown that varying the speed from pitch to pitch leads to large errors in the height of the swing and that batters use the history of previous pitches, knowledge of the pitch count, and ball rotation direction to control their swing. These findings are consistent with the proposal that batters use an estimate of speed to predict pitch height. Contrary to previous findings (Hubbard & Seng, 1954), these batters

seemed to vary the duration of their swing from trial to trial, suggesting that this may be a swing parameter that is controlled on the basis of visual information (Gray, 2002a). Based on this concept, the issue of divided attention comes to the forefront. When a hitter tries to handle more than one function at a time, the message from his eyes will not be clear. The proper use of eyes is important for visual attention. These should be part of a pattern to focus “fine” vision, whereas too early or too late throws off the entire rhythm. This is because of a tendency of one’s eyes to move ahead of objects they are tracking (Dorfman 1995). There is a necessity of prior expectations while hitting. There is an error due to the inadequacy of perceptual information in hitting situations, the short processing time and the batters limited ability to track the ball. This explains why batters get “fooled” by, change-ups and breaking balls (Gray, 2002b). The motion is no longer a single, primitive, consistent movement. Rather, it is an activity: a statistical sequence of movements. Recognition of such a motion requires knowledge about both the appearance of each constituent movement and the statistical properties of the temporal sequence (Bobick, 1997). Applied vision training will improve reaction time and accuracy of pitch recognition. Methods For this study, a single subject was used. He was a 16 year old varsity level baseball player. The subject completed the seven session program over seven weeks. He wore contacts and reported his prescription as .75/1.00. On the intake questionnaire he reported playing baseball for 10 years, practiced hitting six hours per week, and batted .290 last season. For the vision training, the distance from the front of the plate to the machine/pitchers mound was 51 feet instead of the standard 60 feet 6 inches. The distance between home plate and the letter recognition point, was 20 feet. Each week the session started with 25 pitches to get a baseline with a machine, the speed was set at 65 mph. Next, the intervention was used followed by a final 25 pitch baseline again with the machine at the speed of 65 mph. The first intervention involved a basic recognition intervention. Two regulation baseballs with the letters A,B,C,H on one ball and J,K,M,O on the other were used. A simple throwing motion was used and the throw stopped at the release point. This was used for twenty trials. Throughout the following six sessions the intervention involved the same two regulation baseballs. Once again, a simple throwing motion was used and the throw stopped at the release point. This was used for only ten trials. Finally, baseballs with colored stripes (red, green, and blue) were pitched from 51 feet at three-quarters speed. The batter watched ten pitches and called out the color as soon as they could recognize it. This was repeated for another 20 trials with the batter still calling out the colors and swinging at the pitches. Results Within this single case study there were mixed results throughout the seven weeks. Looking at both the beginning and final baselines of each session, as well as the averages, there was no real change. This is the same for the percentage correct with regards to letter recognition and color recognition and for the reaction time of letter

recognition. There is, however, a large change in correct color recognition from session 2 to session 3. The noticeable change is with the average reaction time of the hitters recognition of the colored baseballs. There, amount of correct color recognition does significantly correlate (-.818, p=.047) with an improvement of reaction time, although the fastest reaction average occurred in the session with the second lowest amount correct. Letter Rec

Baseline Session 1 Session 2 Session 3 Session 4 Session 5 Session 6 Session 7

RT Avg

Correct

Unkown

Reaction Time Avg.

Wrong

17

3

1

0.78333

13

8

1

0.923

15

12

3

15

8

0.9

1.108

25

1

18

7

0.8

0.8233

25

13

7

0.9

1.257

11

11

0.8

17

5

14.85714

7

Final Baseline 18

4

0.8883

13

9

4

0.73

19

5

1

4

0.621

19

5

27

1

2

0.673

13

10

0.9225

24

1

5

0.5772

12

12

1

0.931

26

2

2

0.587

17

8

0.914286

0.964019

23.66667

3

3.333333

0.679416667

15.85714

7.571429

Scatterplot of Correct and Reaction Time Avg.

Reaction Times

30

1.4

25 20

1 0.8

Letter Reaction Time Color Reaction Time

0.6

Correct

Time in Sec

1.2

15 10

0.4 5

0.2 0 1

2

3

4 Trials

5

6

7

0 0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Reaction Time Avg.

Discussion Based on the results of this single case study there are many issues that need to be worked out. The key issue is if there is a learning effect or if the results are due to improvement through the intervention. Clearly the reaction time continually decreases after each session but the amount correctly identified does not change significantly. Although there is no change in beginning and final baselines this may be due to the use of a pitching machine for this task. A pitching machine does not mimic a true throwing motion which is what the intervention is targeting. This data alone brings about the

1

possibility of a learning effect versus an actual improvement. Based on the trials with the letter recognition task the latter appears to be the case. There is no steady improvement with that task so it appears that there is something else happening besides just getting better at the task. Among the data there is also a strong implication of improving dual task abilities by having to call out the proper color and hit the ball. The design was not as clean as it should have been. The baseline test should have been pitched in the same manner as the intervention to get a more accurate result. During the intervention the colored balls should have been thrown more consistently, but due to inevitable fatigue, the pitching was not always consistent.

Conclusion Applied vision training for batters is an important area based on the importance of eye sight and acuity in baseball. After the seven week intervention, there was no significant change in baseline scores, but color recognition reaction time did improve. Based on the results this program does appear to have an effect on visual response times and visual acuity. The applied approach allows for an efficient and complete intervention for visual training. Continued research should be done in more detail with experimental and control groups. Having two groups would allow for better comparison, test for learning effects, and track trends better. Other variables that should be investigated are batting averages and on-base percentages.

References Bobick, A.F., Movement, activity and action: the role of knowledge in the perception of motion, Philosophy Transaction. Royal Society of London (1997) 352, 1257-1265 Dorfman HA, Kuehl K, The Mental Game of Baseball, Diamond communications, Lanham, MD 1995 Goldstein, EB., Sensation and Perception, Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, CA 1989 Gray, R. (2002a). Behavior of college baseball players in a virtual batting task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 1131–1148. Gray, R. (2002b). “Markov at the Bat”: A model of cognitive processing in baseball batters. Psychological Science, 13, 543–548. Gray, R (2004). Attending to the Execution of a Complex Sensorimotor Skill: Expertise Differences, Choking, and Slumps. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10, 42-54 Lappe, M., Bremmer, F., and Van den Berg A.V., (1999) Perception of self-motion from visual flow, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 9, 329-336. Seiderman, A., Schneider, S., The Athletic Eye, Hearst Books, New York, NY 1983