An examination of the maintenance of preshot routines in basketball free throw shooting.
Czech, Daniel R. ; Ploszay, AJ ; Burke, Kevin L. 等
Preperformance routines have been found to help focus attention,
reduce anxiety, eliminate distractions, enhance confidence, and be
extremely helpful to mental preparation for an upcoming performance
(Lidor & Singer, 2000; Weinberg & Gould, 2003). Many athletes
have developed the ability to reach the ideal performance state by
associating concentration to specific preperformance routines (Schmid
& Pepper, 1998). Preshot routines have been shown to be an effective
concentration cue in many different sports such as golf, bowling,
basketball, tennis, and skiing. (Cohn, Rotella, & Loyd, 1990;
Kirschenbaum, Ordman, Tomarken, & Holtzbauer, 1982; Lobmeyer &
Wasserman, 1986; McCann, Lavallee, & Lavallee, 2001; Moore, 1986;
Orlick, 1986; Weisberg & Pein, 1992).
Wrisberg and Pein (1992) postulated that closed skills (e.g., free
throw shooting in basketball, serving in tennis and volleyball, punting
and place kicking in football) are often the types of skills in which
athletes utilize preperformance routines to prepare for the best
performance. Routines may help structure the time before performance and
between performances so when it is time to perform, athletes are
mentally ready (Weinberg & Gould, 2003). Schmidt (1982) also
suggested the preshot routine may provide a way of reactivating the
appropriate physiological and mental state before each shot, thus
increasing the chance for a successful performance. Schmidt and Pepper
(1998) supported this notion by stating that preperformance behaviors
enhance performance by getting the athlete ready for the task at hand.
In essence, preshot routine enable athletes to focus thoughts on a
series of well-rehearsed cues, thus reducing the likelihood athletes
will focus on potentially detrimental thoughts such as the outcome,
negative thoughts, or physically performing actions (Boutcher &
Crews, 1987). For instance, in other activities, focusing attention on
hand movements while playing the piano has been found to detract from the performance (Schmidt, 1982).
Rather than be perceived as superstitious actions, Lobmeyer and
Wasserman (1986) found that preperformance routines in basketball free
throw shooting significantly contribute to the accuracy of the shot. In
a similar study, Gayton et al. (1989) had free throw shooters alternate
between using a preshot routine and not using one prior to shooting free
throws. Results revealed a significantly greater percentage of baskets
made with the routine.
The aforementioned studies suggested that a preshot routine may
assist basketball players by reducing the variability of movement in the
shot, thereby increasing confidence. Wrisberg and Pein (1992) revealed
that higher percentage free throw shooters were more consistent in
executing preshot routines than lower percentage free throw shooters. In
addition, no significant effect was found between preshot interval and
gender, as well as preshot interval, shot accuracy, and situational
factors.
Little research was found which examined athletes' specific
actions within routines. Lobmeyer and Wasserman (1986) suggested
investigators should compare performance outcomes between situations
where athletes follow a set routine to situations where deviations occur
(e.g., a player who usually dribbles three times, instead uses five
dribbles). This investigation examined whether shooting percentages were
affected by following and deviating from a specific routine during free
throws. It was hypothesized those basketball players who maintain the
same preshot routine from shot one to shot two will have significantly
higher free throw shooting percentages than those who changed-routines
from shot one to shot two.
Method
Participants
The participants in this study were 16 athletes (9 men and 7 women)
between the ages of 18-23 years old from two men's and women's
basketball teams competing at an NCAA Division I institution in the
southeast. The athletes performed ten or more free throws cumulatively
over five separate games that were observed. Although participants
signed informed consent forms, they were not informed when they would be
observed to maintain external and internal validity. However, in keeping
with the ethics code of section 47 of the APA code, the names, images,
and likeness of all participants were not made public knowledge.
Procedure
The current investigation revolved around the observation often
(five men's and five women's) varsity intercollegiate
basketball games. Two observers were present at each of the ten
basketball games. All data were collected from either the end- or
side-court positions to afford each observer the best view to allow the
most accurate recordings.
Two researchers, independent of each other, monitored and recorded
performance routines for each free throw taken by any player on the
teams using the Preperformance Observational Checklist (PPOC) created
for the express purpose of this investigation.
For each free throw attempted the following information was
observed and recorded: gender, player number, time in the game (first
half/second half) and a physical description of the preshot routine
(deemed any physical movement, pauses in movement, number of dribbles
and/or spins of the basketball). Only "two shot" free throw
experiences were observed. "One and one" or one free throw due
to a technical foul or three point plays were omitted from this study.
To ensure internal validity individual data recorded were compared. No
differences were found among the written observations collected by the
researchers.
Only those basketball players who attempted ten or more free throws
over the five observed games combined were included in the study. Prior
to data collection, the researchers determined that for a participant to
be considered maintaining a preshot routine, the players would have to
perform the same routine at the foul line prior to each shot 90% or more
of the time. A same routine is defined as experiencing the exact actions
from shot one to shot two. Those players not following a routine from
shot to shot two below 90% of the time would be considered
non-maintainers of a routine. The non-maintaining routine group
maintained routines 0-30% of the time. There was a large discrepancy
between non-maintaining routine and maintaining routine groups
respectively.
Results
An independent t-test using SPSS 10.0 was utilized to compare the
maintenance of a preshot routine and free throw shooting performance. In
addition, the mean free throw shooting percentages were calculated and
compared via independent t-tests between maintenance groups, gender and
time in the game (first or second half). See Table I for the mean
demographic data of free throw shooting percentages.
The results indicated that athletes in the Maintaining Routine
Group (MRG--maintained the same routine during successive free throws
90% or more of the time) made 74% (214 of 290) of the free throws.
While, athletes in the Non-Maintaining Routine Group (NMRG--maintained a
routine less than 0-30% of the time) made 68% (166 of 240) of attempted
free throws. Moreover, the NMRG had a lower shooting percentage,
65%-70%, from the first free throw to the second, while the MRG shot 65%
and 82% on the first and second attempts, respectively.
Men averaged a 77% (265 of 345) free throw shooting accuracy, with
8 of the 9 men qualifying for the MRG. Women averaged a 67% (214 of 315)
free throw shooting accuracy and 3 of the 7 women qualified for
placement in the MRG. Men (247 of 322) and women (103 of 134) in the
routine group both had a 77% free throw percentage. When free throw
shooting percentages and maintenance percentages were examined in
relation to the times free throws occurred during the games (first or
second half), the mean shooting percentages for all participants
combined was 68% (first half) and 74% (second half). Furthermore, all
participants maintained a routine 86% of the time in the first half and
94% of the time in the second half.
Discussion
Although the results did not support the hypothesis that the MRG
would have a significantly higher free throw percentage than the NMRG,
the athletes who maintained a preshot routine had a higher free throw
percentage (74%) than those who did not maintain a preshot routine
(68%). This finding supports Lobmeyer and Wasserman (1986) who found
that athletes who maintain a preshot routine perform with greater
accuracy at the free throw line than those who did not maintain a
routine. Similar literature provides empirical support for the popular
belief that a preshot routine facilitates athletic performances in
closed skills (Gayton et al., 1989; Weinberg & Gould, 2003; Wrisberg
& Pein, 1992).
Lobmeyer and Wassermann's (1986) suggested the accuracy may be
explained through Skinner's (1968) pre-current operant theory. This
theory states that a "current operant" directly involves
reinforcement while a "pre-current operant" indirectly affects
the situation through subsequent operants. In free throw situations, the
current operant is the shot, which may be reinforced by a successful
attempt. The preshot routine may be considered to be the pre-current
operant, affecting the shot and thus indirectly influencing the outcome
of the free throw. A pre-current operant may affect a current operant by
altering the probability that the current operant response will be
effective for producing reinforcement (Skinner, 1968). As applied to
free throw shooting, preshot patterns may serve to limit the range of
possible actions performed in the actual shot, thus giving the athlete
more control over the outcome of the free throw (Lobmeyer &
Wasserman, 1986).
In this investigation, the maintaining routine group increased free
throw percentages from shot one (65%) to shot two (83%), while the
non-routine group's free throw percentage decreased from shot one
(70%) to shot two (65%). A possible explanation for this may be that
those who follow a routine incorporate a rhythm from shot one to shot
two. The rhythm may serve as a pre-operant, in the sense that the
routine helps athletes control actions during the shot.
Certain important situational factors may have influenced the
results of this study. First, the score of each game may have influenced
performance. The five women's games observed were all relatively
close contests, while the men's team won all of the games handily.
Athletes may perceive an increase in pressure at the free throw line at
the end of close games which may influence outcomes. Perceived pressure
and anxiety may have debilitating effects on concentration and
subsequent performance (Burke & Brown, 2003). Thus, the female
basketball players may have been focusing so much on outcome that the
routine may have been altered or interrupted.
More importantly, the non-maintaining routine group consisted of
only one male and four females. In addition, the maintaining routine
group consisted of eight men and three women. The greater free throw
percentage for the MRG may be confounded by the fact that men had a
higher free throw percentage than women. The free throw differential may
be a result of the low number of men in the NMRG.
Another variable examined was free throw shooting percentage during
different game times (first half, second half). Athletes may not have
perceived the free throws as being as influential (on the outcome) in
the first half and thus did not concentrate as fully on executing the
preshot routine. Future research in the area of preshot routines and
closed skills may benefit from utilizing longer observation protocols
and larger samples of basketball players at various levels (i.e., high
school, college, professional). Also, future research may want to
examine the development of preshot routines during practice situations.
Particular attention may be focused on both the mental and physical
aspects of free throw shooting routines (Burke & Brown, 2003).
Table 1
Mean Demographic Data of Free Throw Shooting Percentages
Group Number of Free Number of Free Free Throw
Throws Made Throws Attempted Percentage
Maintaining
Routine Group 214 290 74%
Non-Maintaining
Routine Group 160 240 68%
Men 265 345 77%
Women 214 315 68%
Group Number of
Participants
Maintaining
Routine Group 11
(8 men and 3 women)
Non-Maintaining
Routine Group 5
(1 man and 4 women)
Men 9
Women 7
References
Boutcher, S. H., & Crews, D. J. (1987). The effect of preshot
attentional routine on a well-learned skill. International Journal of
Sport Psychology, 18, 30-39.
Burke, K. L,. & Brown, D. (2003). Sport psychology library:
Basketball. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.
Cohn, P. J., Rotella, R. J., & Lloyd, J. W. (1990). Effects of
cognitive-behavioral intervention on the preshot routine and performance
in golf. The Sport Psychologist, 4, 33-47.
Gayton, W. F., Cielinski, K. L., Francis-Keniston, W. J., & J.
F. Hearns. (1989). Effects of preshot routine on free throw shooting.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 68, 317-318.
Kirschenbaum, D. S., Ordman, A. M., Tomarken, A. J., Holtzbauer, R.
(1982). Effects of differential self-monitoring and level of mastery on
sports performance: Brain power bowling. Cognitive Therapy and Research,
6, 335-342.
Lidor, R,. & Singer, R. N. (2000). Teaching preperformance
routines to beginners. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, &
Dance, 71, 34-36.
Lobmeyer, D. L., & Wasserman, E. A. (1986). Preliminaries to
free throw shooting: superstitious behavior? Journal of Sport Behavior,
9, 70-78.
McCann, P., Lavallee, D., & Lavallee, R. M. (2001). The effect
of preshot routines on golf wedge shot performance. European Journal of
Sport Science, 1, 1-10.
Moore, W. E. (1986). Covert-overt service routines: The effects of
a service routine training program on elite tennis players. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia
Orlick, T. (1986). Psyching for sport: Mental training for
athletes. Champaign, IL: Leisure Press.
Schmid, A., & Pepper, E. (1998). Strategies for training. In J.
Williams (Ed.), Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak
performance (pp. 316-328). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Co.
Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (1999). Motor control and
learning: A behavioral emphasis (3rd ed.). Illinois: Human Kinetics.
Skinner, B. F. (1968). The technology of teaching. New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Weinberg, R. S., & Gould, D. (2003). Foundations of sport and
exercise psychology (3rd ed.).Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Wrisberg, C. A., & Pein, R. L. (1992). The preshot interval and
free throw shooting accuracy: An exploratory investigation. The Sport
Psychologist, 6, 14-23
Daniel R. Czech
Georgia Southern University
AJ Ploszay
University of Tennessee
Address Correspondence To: Kevin L. Burke, Ph.D., PO Box 8076,
Georgia Southern Unviersity, Statesboro, GA 30460-8076.