This study examined how organized team basketball players learn tactics using Virtual Reality (VR). We interviewed 13 experienced players about learning a pick-and-roll scenario with a VR prototype under varying user perspectives (egocentric vs. exocentric) and graphical fidelity levels. Thematic analysis highlighted that offense is fluid and less dependent on defensive knowledge, whereas defense demands deep understanding of offense. Participants reported that first-person (egocentric) view enhanced immersion, while third-person (exocentric) view improved spatial awareness. Simplified avatars focused attention, whereas realistic avatars supported decision-making. Clear role representation was crucial for coordination; confusion and limited spatial cues impeded performance. Although participants saw VR as a valuable supplement to traditional training, they noted potential adoption barriers due to unfamiliarity. The results suggest VR basketball training should offer adjustable perspectives and avatar fidelity to effectively teach diverse player roles.
AbichJ.ParkerJ.MurphyJ. S.EudyM. (2021). A review of the evidence for training effectiveness with virtual reality technology. Virtual Reality, 25(4), 919–933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-020-00498-8
2.
AgliotiS. M.CesariP.RomaniM.UrgesiC. (2008). Action anticipation and motor resonance in elite basketball players. Nature Neuroscience, 11(9), 1109–1116. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2182
3.
Al KhalifahE.HammadyR.AbdelrahmanM.Al-ShamailehO.MarghanyM.El-JarnH.DarwishA.KurtY. (2025). Technology anxiety in virtual reality adoption: Examining the impact of age, past experience, and cybersickness. IEEE Access, 13, 71858–71879. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3562383
4.
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2012). Thematic analysis. In CooperH.CamicP. M.LongD. L.PanterA. T.RindskopfD.SherK. J. (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological Association.
5.
CovaciA.OlivierA.-H.MultonF. (2015). Visual perspective and feedback guidance for VR free-throw training. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 35(5), 55–65. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2015.95
6.
FarrellM. J. (1996). Topographical disorientation. Neurocase, 2(6), 509–520.
7.
GorisseG.ChristmannO.AmatoE. A.RichirS. (2017). First-and third-person perspectives in immersive virtual environments: Presence and performance analysis of embodied users. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 4, 33.
8.
GugertyL.BrooksJ. (2004). Reference-frame misalignment and cardinal direction judgments: Group differences and strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied, 10(2), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.10.2.75
9.
HabibM.SiriguA. (1987). Pure topographical disorientation: A definition and anatomical basis. Cortex, 23(1), 73–85.
10.
HadlowS. M.PanchukD.MannD. L.PortusM. R.AbernethyB. (2018). Modified perceptual training in sport: A new classification framework. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 21(9), 950–958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2018.01.011
11.
HsingH.BairaktarovaD.LauN. (2023). Using eye gaze to reveal cognitive processes and strategies of engineering students when solving spatial rotation and mental cutting tasks. Journal of Engineering Education, 112(1), 125–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20495
12.
KallioH.PietiläA.JohnsonM.KangasniemiM. M., (2016). Systematic methodological review: Developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954–2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031
13.
KrauseD.WeigeltM. (2023). Mental rotation of tactic board instructions in basketball: Domain-specific expertise improves on-court performance. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 94(2), 568–577. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2021.2022587
14.
KrauseL.FarrowD.ReidM.BuszardT.PinderR. (2018). Helping coaches apply the principles of representative learning design: Validation of a tennis specific practice assessment tool. Journal of Sports Science, 36(11), 1277–1286. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2017.1374684
15.
LiuQ.WangY.TangQ.LiuZ. (2020). Do you feel the same as I do? Differences in virtual reality technology experience and acceptance between elderly adults and college students. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 573673. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.573673
16.
NBA on TNT (Director). (2023, February10). “It’s never good when a bull runs full steam ahead” | Shaqtin’ a fool [Video recording]. Author. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_Sx0MDNM6Q
17.
PinderR. A.DavidsK.RenshawI.AraújoD. (2011). Representative learning design and functionality of research and practice in sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 33(1), 146–155. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.33.1.146
18.
SwellerJ. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285.
19.
TaçgınZ. (2020). The perceived effectiveness regarding immersive virtual reality learning environments changes by the prior knowledge of learners. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 2791–2809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10088-0
20.
TsaiW. L.ChungM. F.PanT. Y.HuM. C. (2017). Train in virtual court: Basketball tactic training via virtual reality [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Workshop on Multimedia-Based Educational and Knowledge Technologies for Personalized and Social Online Training. https://doi.org/10.1145/3132390.3132394
21.
TsaiW.-L.PanT.-Y.HuM.-C. (2022). Feasibility study on virtual reality based basketball tactic training. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 28(8), 2970–2982. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2020.3046326
22.
WickensC. D.HollandsJ. G.BanburyS.ParasuramanR. (2015). Engineering psychology and human performance. Psychology Press.
