Abstract
Skill in estimating distances is essential for professional athletes as well as many nonathletes. How this skill can be acquired was considered by the authors in an experimental study. Three factors (target size, target distance, and the use of instruments) were investigated using a factorial design with repeated measures. The instruments consisted of two portable range finders employing different principles: coincident image and stadiametric ranging. Both instruments are commercially available. Those were compared with the performance of the naked eye. Sixteen subjects each made 12 range estimates; subjects were not given performance feedback following trials.
No significant differences were found between performances using either instrument or the unaided eye. Subjects, on the average, made more accurate estimates with the stadiametric instruments for both targets at both distances. The unaided eye was consistently least accurate. Subjects preferred the coincident image device over the stadiametric one. Recommendations were made for a training technique that would utilize the latter device and immediate feedback to train athletes in distance-judging skills. In general, it was found that training would be most parsimonious if subjects alternated between the stadiametric device and the unaided eye.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.