Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Talent identification (TI) programmes in sports, such as volleyball, often rely on subjective evaluations without formal guidelines, leading to inconsistent talent selection. While the Expanded Model of Talent Development (EMTD) is a widely adopted framework for TI, it lacks sport-specific criteria. The aims of this study are to elaborate on the EMTD by identifying key anthropometric, physiological, and skill characteristics for TI of adolescent volleyball players from the perspectives of elite coaches (i.e., national or international- level coaches), and to explore how biomechanics support coaches’ traditional TI methods. Data collection involved two online Nominal Group Technique (NGT) meetings with eight elite volleyball coaches. Quantitative analysis of coaches’ rankings and qualitative examination of transcripts were conducted. The coaches selected and consolidated nine key characteristics for TI in volleyball. These included three anthropometric characteristics (standing reach height, peak height velocity, and arm span), four physiological characteristics (vertical jump, speed, agility, and core strength/stability), and two skill characteristics (hand-eye coordination and perceptual skills/spatial awareness). Regarding biomechanics, the coaches’ perspectives ranged from scepticism to strong support. Some coaches advocated for low-cost field-based assessments (e.g., vertical jump, chalk tests), while others recommended advanced lab-based assessments (e.g., movement analysis and physical screening) to enhance efficiency, injury prevention, and objectivity in TI. These insights informed a two-tiered list of recommended assessments. Coaches should consider applying these tests to identify talented volleyball players. Sports biomechanics can assist in this process. Further research involving longitudinal tests is necessary to examine the effects of these characteristics over time.

Keywords

Anthropometry biomechanics motor skills physiology spatial awareness

Introduction

Talent identification (TI) programmes have become popular in high-level team sports due to the financial rewards of winning and the large investments needed to achieve success.¹ The main goal of TI programmes is to identify athletes with the potential for exceptional performance and provide them with an environment that supports their development and sports achievements.¹ However, imprecise decisions in TI can also have negative consequences for all stakeholders involved, such as increased dropout rates, reduced motivation, and misallocated resources or investments.² TI programmes target athletes across different age groups, including children, adolescents, and adults. This study focuses on adolescents as they are in a critical developmental phase marked by rapid growth and maturation, making it a pivotal period for skill acquisition and athletic development.³

In 2013, the Differentiating Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT) was updated to the Expanded Model of Talent Development (EMTD).⁴ The original DMGT provided a framework outlining the factors influencing giftedness and talent, while the EMTD expanded on this by describing how various competencies, including sports, develop from natural abilities divided into mental and physical domains. In the context of volleyball, the mental domain includes cognitive abilities, decision-making, and psychological resilience that influence game intelligence and adaptability under pressure. The physical domain, on the other hand, encompasses skill, anthropometric, and physiological characteristics which directly affect volleyball-specific actions. Although the EMTD offers a comprehensive framework, it lacks sport-specific criteria for precise TI.⁴ Consequently, the current study extends the EMTD by strengthening its “Physical” category within the “Gifts” column, adapting it specifically to volleyball through the integration of volleyball-specific performance indicators. This adaptation focuses on identifying key characteristics within the anthropometric, physiological, and skill domains to improve the TI process for adolescent volleyball players. While cognitive and psychological traits in the mental domain of the EMTD are acknowledged as important in the broader TI process, this study focuses exclusively on the physical domain to allow for a more in-depth exploration within the scope of a single study.

To enhance the accuracy of TI, it is crucial to incorporate elite coaches’ perspectives as they play a significant role in the TI process.⁵ However, research on expert perspectives regarding TI in adolescent volleyball players is limited. While research on expert perspectives in volleyball TI is limited, coaches’ views regarding TI have been explored in other sports. Qualitative studies in football^6,7 and racquet sports⁸ have demonstrated that consulting expert coaches facilitates the identification of sport-specific key anthropometric, physiological, and skill-related characteristics relevant to TI. These findings emphasise the relevance of expert input and highlight the value of extending such investigations to the context of volleyball.

The game of volleyball consists of six fundamental technical skills including passing, setting, spiking, blocking, digging, and serving. Block and spike skills have been identified as crucial factors for team success in volleyball since these are the core techniques for scoring.⁹ Besides these technical skills, motor skills such as eye-hand coordination, depth perception, serve-reception and reaction time, have also been identified as key factors that differentiate talent in volleyball players.¹⁰

In addition to skills, anthropometric characteristics such as height,⁷ standing reach height,¹⁰ limb length,¹¹ and body fat percentage¹¹ have demonstrated their capacity to differentiate between different performance levels of volleyball players.¹² Players with greater height, standing reach height and limb length generally have an advantage in playing above the net, particularly in attacking and blocking, where reach is critical. Additionally, a lower body fat percentage contributes to agility and quick directional changes, which are essential for defensive plays such as digging and lateral movements. By influencing these key aspects of the game, these anthropometric characteristics directly impact an athlete's overall effectiveness on the court.^10–12 Ectomorph somatotype characteristics are frequently observed among volleyball players of national teams,¹³ suggesting that excessive muscle mass may not be essential for this non-contact sport. However, paradoxically, endomorphic and mesomorphic characteristics have been found to be advantageous for specific positions. For instance, liberos and defensive specialists, who require a lower centre of gravity for effective digging and floor defence, may benefit from endomorphic traits.¹¹

Physiological characteristics like lower-body muscular power,¹⁰ upper limb strength,¹⁴ speed, and agility¹⁰ have been demonstrated to provide advantages in both defensive and offensive manoeuvres during volleyball games. Additionally, contemporary research posits that anaerobic capacity can serve as a discriminating factor between players in elite leagues due to the sport's recurrent short bouts of high intensity.¹² In contrast, the relationship between aerobic capacity and volleyball performance remains inconsistent.¹⁰ Advanced biological maturation has been associated with favourable anthropometric and physiological variables, although these advantages only appear in junior athletes and may diminish with chronological age.¹⁵

Despite the scientific findings above, TI still often heavily relies on coaches’ experience and intuition, leading to inconsistent TI.⁵ The reliability and objectivity of TI programmes can be significantly enhanced by integrating objective and validated measurements from the field of sports biomechanics.¹⁶ Biomechanics offer data-driven insights into movement efficiency, force generation, and technical execution, offering a complementary tool to traditional TI methods. For instance, biomechanical analysis, such as proximal-to-distal sequencing in volleyball spiking, shows potential for aiding in TI.¹⁶ Furthermore, the use of kinetic and kinematic variables measured by force platforms has proven to be a reliable tool for assessing jump performance that distinguishes between populations.¹⁷ In other sports, biomechanical analysis has been recognised as valuable tool in TI, helping to identify movement patterns associated with elite performance. For example, studies in cycling have shown that assessing muscle typology can contribute to TI by indicating sprint performance.¹⁸ In addition, research on ice hockey highlight the importance of assessing acceleration, speed, and the ability to repeat sprints, as these are crucial for high-level performance and TI.¹⁹ The integration of these biomechanical tools into volleyball TI could refine talent selection by providing objective, quantitative assessments alongside traditional evaluations. Despite these promising techniques, their applications in assisting the TI remain limited, highlighting the need for further exploration and implementation in TI programmes. This study focused on gaining a deeper understanding of the characteristics under the anthropometric, physiological, and skill domains within the EMTD framework by leveraging the insights and opinions of elite coaches in volleyball. Appendix A provides a conceptual visualisation of this contribution, illustrating how the identified characteristics and associated biomechanics assessments expand on the physical domain of the EMTD. Accordingly, the aims of this study were twofold: (1) to elaborate on the EMTD by identifying key anthropometric, physiological, and skill characteristics and their corresponding assessments that are essential for identifying talented adolescent volleyball players from the perspectives of experienced elite coaches; and (2), to explore how sports biomechanics can support coaches’ traditional TI methods.

Methods

This study was conducted using the Nominal Group Technique (NGT), which is a mixed-method design that combines quantitative ranking of ideas and qualitative analysis. A description of the used NGT-method can be found in Appendix B. NGT was utilised for its ability to generate a wide range of ideas from participants, prioritise those ideas through individual rankings, and allow for in-depth discussions that explore participants’ subjective experiences and perspectives.²⁰ The prioritised ideas can then be transformed into actionable points that address the identified issues.

Participants

Eight elite volleyball male coaches aged 36–65 (mean 50, SD 11), an average of 26.5 (SD 12.6) years coaching experience in their countries, were recruited using a passive snowballing technique as the appropriate judgmental sampling method, considering the highly specific population of experts in the field of TI in volleyball. Coaches were selected based on their expertise in coaching volleyball. In this study, ‘elite’ refers to coaches with experience coaching at the national team or international level, and who have experience in identifying talented adolescent volleyball players. The recruitment process began with an experienced professional volleyball coach who had a connection to the researchers but did not participate directly in the following research phases to reduce confirmation and affinity bias and preconceived notions. This coach contacted individuals within their national and international network, who subsequently referred other coaches within their own networks, facilitating a targeted recruitment of relevant experts.

All interested coaches received an invitation email with detailed project information and consent forms. Coaches were eligible if they met the following criteria: (i) have coaching experience at the national or international level, (ii) have experience with TI of adolescent volleyball players, (iii) be able to communicate in English. All selected coaches received and completed the participant information statement and consent forms prior to the meeting, which outlined the purpose of the study, procedures, and their right to withdraw at any time without penalty. Additionally, coaches provided explicit consent for video recording of the meetings. Ethics approval was obtained by the university's Human Ethics Committee (reference number 2022/616) in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki prior to the study. This study adhered to ethical principles of voluntary participation, confidentiality, and informed consent to ensure the rights and well-being of the participants throughout the research process.

Data collection

In January and February 2023, two online 2-h group meetings were conducted, following a modified version of NGT as described by McMillan et al. (2014).²⁰ The aim of these meetings was to explore the characteristics that are most important to consider when identifying talented adolescent volleyball players from elite coaches’ perspectives. One researcher (E.B.) led the group discussion with two research assistants (S.L. and C.L.) who assisted with notetaking and ensuring the smooth operation of the virtual meeting. The decision to conduct two sessions was based on balancing the time availability of busy elite coaches and ensuring sufficient depth of discussion. Two 2-h sessions allowed for structured yet manageable engagement while maintaining participant attention and energy levels in an online setting. Additional sessions were considered but deemed less feasible due to logistical constraints.

Prior to the group meetings, the participants were sent an information video that outlined the research objectives, explained the structure of the online group discussions, and provided instructions for the preparatory task. In this preparatory task, coaches were asked to reflect in advance on four open-ended questions that would also be addressed during the group meeting: i) “What anthropometric characteristics and standardised assessments do you consider important to identify talented adolescent volleyball players?”, ii) “What physiological characteristics and standardised assessments do you consider important to identify talented adolescent volleyball players?”, iii) “What technical skills and standardised assessments do you consider important to identify talented adolescent volleyball players?”, and iv) “How can sport biomechanics help you to identify talented adolescent volleyball players?”.

During the group meetings, the same four questions served as the basis for discussion, allowing for the collection of key anthropometric, physiological, and skill characteristics, as well as recommended objective field-based and laboratory-based assessments. Both NGT-meetings followed the same four rounds of the NGT process.²⁰ In the first round, participants were given one minute to silently review and supplement their pre-recorded ideas. In the second round, participants took turns sharing one idea at a time in a round-robin format, with ideas recorded in a shared visual document, while duplication of ideas and discussions were avoided. The third round consisted of a group discussion in which each idea was briefly clarified to ensure shared understanding, after which the facilitator grouped overlapping ideas and revised the list in real time, with participant approval. In the final round, each participant independently ranked the ideas by importance using a points system, whereby the most important idea received the highest score (equal to the total number of ideas) and the least important received a score of one. This process was repeated within the domains of anthropometric, physiological, and skill characteristics, and participants were also asked to complete sub-rankings and provide elaboration on selected ideas. To maintain independence and avoid group influence, the rankings and elaborations recorded by the participants on their individual sheets were not shared with the others (Appendix B). The two-session design was chosen to balance feasibility, given participants’ limited availability, with the need for sufficient depth and rigour.

Data analysis

Nominal group ranking

Scores assigned to the ideas were recorded in Microsoft Office Excel spreadsheets. The first stage of analysis focused on identifying any anomalies or nuances within the data. The sum of scores and ranked priority were calculated for each idea, and the raw data was organised by calculating the relative importance using the equation described by McMillan et al.²⁰: (score achieved for the item) / (maximum possible score) × 100. Details are described in Appendix B.

Qualitative analysis

The transcripts were read to familiarise with the data to develop a thematic analysis. Ideas were grouped into common major domains and subdomains that were compared with existing evidence for similarities and differences. In the final stage of qualitative analysis, the transcripts were analysed to describe the underlying rationale and discussion arising from the clarification phase. The researchers applied the secondary classification framework to analyse the transcripts.²⁰ The NVivo software (Release 1.7.1, Lumivero, Australia) was used to assist in coding and categorising the ideas, which were then compared to explore patterns and differences in participants’ rankings and elaborations.

Results

Participant characteristics

Twenty coaches were invited of whom eight male elite volleyball coaches consented to participate in this study. Table 1 presents an overview of the participants’ demographic characteristics.

Table 1.

Demographic characteristics of participants.

Participant	Gender	Profession	Longevity of experience (years)	Scope of experience	Country
P1	M	Indoor/Beach	20	International	Australia
P2	M	Indoor/Beach	25	International	Australia
P3	M	Indoor/Beach	45	International	Australia
P4	M	Indoor	30	International	Australia/Canada
P5	M	Indoor	7	National	Bulgaria
P6	M	Indoor/Beach	40	International	Australia
P7	M	Indoor/Beach	15	International	Australia/USA
P8	M	Indoor/Beach	30	International	Australia

Note. ‘Profession’ indicates coaching in indoor or beach volleyball, ‘Longevity of experience’ specifies years of coaching, ‘Scope of experience’ denotes the level (International/National), and ‘Country’ shows coaching locations. Abbreviations used: M = male; P1-P8 = participant number.

Nominal group ranking

Across the sessions, coaches identified and ranked a total of 21 characteristics relevant for TI, encompassing six anthropological, eight physiological, and seven skill characteristics. To offer comprehensive insights, these characteristics were additionally ranked within the three domains, and detailed sub-rankings were conducted. (Appendix C).

The nine highest ranked characteristics, in descending order, were: vertical jump, speed, height, coordination, agility, peak height velocity (PHV), arm span, core strength/stability, and perceptual skills/spatial awareness (Figure 1(a)). These nine outcomes represent the three top ranked anthropometric characteristics, the four top ranked physiological characteristics, and the two top ranked skill characteristics. Thus, physiological characteristics dominated the overall rankings, with vertical jump and speed consistently prioritised.

Figure 1.

Results ranking characteristics. Note. Results of the rankings retrieved from group discussions with elite volleyball coaches. (a) Ranked combined list of ideas, (b) Ranked anthropometric characteristics, (c) Ranked physiological characteristics, (d) Ranked skill characteristics, (e) Sub-ranking for height, (f) Sub-ranking for coordination. Relative importance was calculated using the equation: (score achieved for the item) / (maximum possible score) × 100. Characteristics in bold reflect the nine highest ranked characteristics.

Figure 1(b)–(d) show the top-ranked characteristics within each domain. Figure 1(e) and (f) show the sub-rankings completed by the coaches for two characteristics: height and coordination. These two characteristics were considered as fairly broad, so sub-rankings were conducted to provide more specific insights. Within the sub-ranking for the anthropometric characteristic of height, reaching height received the highest rank, and within the sub-ranking for the skill characteristic of coordination, eye-hand coordination received the highest rank.

Although consensus was generally strong, individual preferences varied slightly, particularly in prioritising skill over anthropometric attributes.

Biomechanics

Biomechanics was not explicitly ranked as a distinct category as it is a methodological approach to evaluate the physical performance indicators (i.e., anthropometric, physiological, and skill characteristics) by understanding how the body moves and functions, but it was discussed in relation to the key characteristics of TI. While some coaches expressed scepticism regarding its contribution to TI, others acknowledged its potential value and suggested both basic and advanced assessments. Basic, field-based tests, such as chalk on a wall to measure jump height, were considered practical and repeatable. In contrast, advanced testing methods were proposed to enhance the collection of qualitative data on athletes. Techniques such as movement analysis across the court and video analyses were identified as useful tools for evaluating efficiency and effectiveness. Additionally, the use of standardised physical screenings to assess load management, core strength and general injury risk was regarded as beneficial for refining the TI processes.

Qualitative analysis

Qualitative analysis identified four major domains that align with our research questions: anthropometric, physiological, and skill characteristics, as well as the role of biomechanics. The coding process further revealed several dominant themes within each of these domains. Specifically, within the domain of anthropometric characteristics, two subdomains emerged: maturation and anthropometry. In the domain of physiological characteristics, three subdomains were identified: speed/agility, vertical jump, and core functionality. For the domain of skill characteristics, two subdomains emerged: coordination and perceptual skills. Lastly, within the domain of biomechanics, two subdomains were identified: basic testing and advanced testing. Illustrative quotations for each subdomain are provided in Table 2, offering further insight into these findings.

Table 2.

Selected illustrative quotations.

Major domains	Subdomains
Anthropometric characteristics	Maturation
	[P1]	The Peak Height Velocity (PHV) is where they are in their growth: whether they have reached it, or they still got a lot of the growth stuff to come.
	[P6]	PHV is just about sort of more tracking maturity and for training or purposes and stuff.
	[P8]	The main one is that they are considered tall for age as an indicator.
	Anthropometry
	[P1]	I think the standing reach is the height component that we want. Your vertical height, standing height, sitting height, reaches, and all those sorts of things to get that whole body description is useful, but - in terms of directly into the game - if they’re shorter but have longer arms, that's probably equal as they’re touching at the same height.
	[P3]	Typically, we have always measured height as being the top of someone's head, but their standing reach height is more relevant really, because it takes into account the length of their arms. You are obviously playing the ball with your hands, so it makes some sense.
	[P3]	Not only in net skills getting above the net, a bigger arm span is an advantage on court skills as well, because you are going to reach more balls, for example, in defence.
	[P6]	The only time I’d be using sitting height is for working on PHV.
	[P6]	Arm span does give a slightly different perspective. It's as a secondary thing along with height.
	[P7]	I like athletes with longer arms, because they can be faster at hitting.
Physiological characteristics	Speed/agility
	[P1]	The lateral movement is really critical: the change of direction, the absolute speed and things like that. So, determining which tests are the most relevant is probably the most challenging part in that.
	[P6]	It's about making small adjustments, moving one way, then changing to a completely different direction. Not just straight-line speed.
	[P6]	Acceleration is the ability to move as fast as you can - in any direction, in any of your limbs, in anything - which is very important.
	[P7]	Our ability to accelerate and change direction is really important.
	[P7]	Going from slow to our absolute fastest over 3 and a half, 4 meters, and converting that force into the ground to go up is very important in the sport.
	[P7]	It's just really important, because you have to move quickly to intercept a moving object which is moving extremely quickly at times. So yeah, that ability is very important for a volleyball player.
	Vertical jump
	[P1]	I think the key bit is the work height that they can play the game at, because we have got a barrier and we need to be able to contact the ball at certain heights.
	[P6]	Vertical jump is also a rough indicator of muscle composition: it gives you a vague idea of fast switch.
	[P8]	There's a lot of jumping in volleyball - we want to contact the ball as high as we can when we attack. So that's kind of important.
	Core functionality
	[P1]	We are a whole-body sport, right? We have a lot of movement things and a lot of different movement patterns where you have to be able to use your whole body - your core links all of that.
	[P3]	If you’re going to produce power and speed, you need a good strong core.
	[P6]	It's basically just making sure that all the body is working - sort of biomechanically efficiently.
	[P6]	In theory, core control reduces pain, which means that athletes can learn more effectively.
	[P6]	It's just that core control, at highest level, is manifested in being able to make really small changes really, really quickly. To set, to pass, to deflect to whatever and that kind of stuff.
Skill characteristics	Coordination
	[P1]	Hand-eye, or arm-eye coordination. We use our forearms for the sport, so just that understanding of being able to connect their arm to the ball.
	[P1]	The upper body, lower body movement separation: the ability to do the two things independent of one another.
	[P5]	We see a lot of kids that do not have basic fundamental coordination skills. That is why we are trying to get them back to athletics.
	Perceptual skills
	[P3]	Service reception skills. A bit of the perceptual stuff, so reading the serve, but also the technique - the form.
	[P3]	The ability to read and understand the situation.
	[P4]	Vision and tracking: being able to track the course of the ball or the path of the player.
	[P8]	Spatial awareness is kind of an agility movement thing, as well as just the awareness of where to be in relation to the ball at particular times. Some people just have it. Others do need to work on it.
Role of biomechanics	Basic testing
	[P6]	In terms of TI, we’re talking about children with not necessarily any skill at all. So, we’re not looking at really sensitive tests. We’re looking at a range of tests to give a decent idea of what the abilities of that person are.
	[P7]	I don’t see how biomechanics will necessarily help the screen process so much at this level, but maybe the guys will inspire some ideas.
	[P8]	A lot of the testing is done in the field. It's very basic equipment and the basic tests and that's the starting point. So, there are no labs. It could even be some chalk on the wall with your fingers and touch and measure.
	[P8]	Particularly if you’re trying to repeat this across the country and we have only had limited lab resources. Often, it's just in a hall or even outside.
	[P8]	We measure just a few things, wanting to remain inclusive, not exclusive. So, not trying to cut people out, just making sure we don’t lose anyone that we should be including.
	Advanced testing
	[P1]	Collection of data: recording the qualitative assessment of information of the athletes.
	[P2]	Serve technique: maximising efficiency, effectiveness, and entry prevention, and just looking at the different types of serves. So, it is to improve control as well as tactical placement
	[P2]	General movement analysis across the court - again trying to maximise the efficiency, effectiveness, and injury, prevention - and we are trying to improve particularly looking at improving transition between offensive and defensive phases.
	[P2]	Specific movement analysis for setters: looking to maximise efficiency effect, and also into prevention.
	[P3]	You need a functional measure for core strength, not a static measure.
	[P3]	Qualitative assessment of spike jump technique.
	[P4]	Load management: talking about number of jumps, percentage of maximum jumps, sub maximal jumps, and then kilojoules of energy used on landing based on body weight percentage of jump.
	[P4]	General injury risk identification is about boundary limits – about what a medium, what a high, what a low jump load will be. So, it's about setting boundaries based on age and structural tolerance of the athlete.
	[P5]	Video analysis – slow motion analysis.
	[P6]	Consistency in testing at all levels, like standardisation.
	[P6]	Physical screening is something that biomechanics could help.

Note: Information in italics indicates the participant number.

In summary, results show a clear emphasis among coaches on physiological characteristics, particularly vertical jump and speed, for early TI. While skill traits were recognised, they were often considered trainable rather than innate, explaining their relatively lower rankings. Anthropometric features like height and arm span were valued for immediate impact on game play but often considered in conjunction with physical capacity. Biomechanics was seen as supportive rather than central to early-stage TI, especially given the practical constraints of most testing environments.

Discussion

The objectives of this study were twofold: to elaborate on the EMTD by identifying the essential characteristics for TI in volleyball as perceived by elite coaches, and to provide an overview of recommended assessments aligned with existing evidence, leveraging the expertise of biomechanists to support coaches’ traditional TI methods.

Essential characteristics for talent identification in volleyball

Nine essential characteristics for TI in volleyball were identified across three domains - anthropometric, physiological, skill characteristics - through two group meetings with elite volleyball coaches: vertical jump, speed, height, coordination, agility, peak height velocity (PHV), arm span, core strength/stability, and perceptual skills/spatial awareness. These criteria are encapsulated within a triangle-shaped framework that elaborates on the physical domains of the EMTD, with traits influenced by genetic predispositions at the base and skills amenable to improvement through training at the apex (Figure 2). To our knowledge, one previous study also developed a TI framework that ranks characteristics based on coaches’ insights, using a questionnaire to rank a selection of anthropometric, psychological, physiological, and skill characteristics.²¹ Although the psychological attributes in their model fell outside the scope of the present study, their framework shows substantial overlap regarding anthropometric and physiological characteristics such as height, arm span, agility, and (leg) power. However, unlike the present findings, their highest-ranked characteristics also includes volleyball-specific skills such as spike and serve among the top characteristics. While such volleyball-specific skills were also mentioned during the NGT-meetings, they were not prioritised within the final top nine. Instead, the open-ended nature of the methodology facilitated the identification of core strength/stability as well as perceptual skills, which were not included as ranking options in Noori and Sadeghi's structured questionnaire. This suggests that methodological design may influence the breadth and type of characteristics identified in talent identification research.

Figure 2.

Recommended assessment criteria for talent identification in volleyball. Note. The asterisk indicates consistency with previous model.

Anthropometric characteristics

The significance of anthropometry and maturation in identifying talented volleyball players was exemplified by the top three anthropometric characteristics: reaching height, PHV, and arm span.

Among these, the coaches emphasised that reaching height, rather than vertical height, is the most relevant in volleyball. One coach stated, “You are obviously playing the ball with your hands”, underscoring the importance of arm reach in volleyball. Furthermore, coaches considered reaching height crucial for achieving effective attacking and blocking. These findings align with previous research showing that taller players exhibit heightened attacking efficiency and enhanced blocking capabilities.²² This advantage is largely attributed to their ability to contact the ball at a higher point above the net generating more downward force and power in their attacks, which makes it challenging for the opposing team to defend. Additionally, a greater reach also provides players with a wider range of hitting angles, making it more difficult for blockers to anticipate and defend against their attacks.²³ In blocking, a greater reach height allows players to reach higher, reducing the attacker's available hitting angles and creating a stronger defensive barrier.²³

In addition to reaching height, PHV, a measure of growth status, was identified by the coaches as a potential beneficial anthropometric characteristic for players who are considered tall for their age. This finding partially aligns existing research, which presents conflicting results regarding the relationship between PHV and performance.²⁴ On the one hand, early developers are often taller than the late developers, which enhances their physical presence on the court and allows them more time to refine their skills and adapt their technique to their changing body. On the other hand, late-maturing individuals may have an advantage due to a longer period of more gradual growth, leading to a higher adult stature and improved skill refinement alongside their changing body proportions.

Finally, the importance of arm span was emphasised by the coaches as another key anthropometric characteristics. One coach remarked that they prefer athletes with longer arms, stating, “I like athletes with longer arms, because they are faster at hitting”. Another coach added that a larger arm span contributes to better court skills, saying “A bigger arm span is an advantage on court skills as well”. These insights align with previous research, which demonstrated the use of arm span to discriminate between playing levels.⁸ Although research on the underlying mechanisms remains limited, one study by Das et al. supports notion that a greater arm span contributes to increased velocity in both serve and attack, due to the greater radius of rotation, resulting in greater linear velocity.²⁵

Physiological characteristics

Building on the anthropometric advantages discussed earlier, the coaches also emphasised the importance of physiological characteristics in TI in volleyball. Among these physiological characteristics, coaches prioritised vertical jump, speed, agility, and core strength/stability.

Vertical jump was regarded as essential to “contact the ball as high as we can when we attack”, as one coach explained. This corresponds to findings that jump height is a performance determinant in volleyball.^23,26 Moreover, one coach suggested that vertical jump could serve as a proxy for muscle composition, saying, “vertical jump is a rough indicator of muscle composition: it gives you a vague idea of fast twitch”. This perspective is supported by research linking jump height and Type II fibre percentage in well-trained athletes.²⁷

In addition to vertical jump, enhanced agility and speed were also emphasised for their importance in achieving swift and seamless transition in movement direction and court coverage. One coach highlighted this by saying, “you have to move quickly to intercept a moving object which is moving extremely quickly at times”. This aligns with previous research showing that agility and speed are key factors in distinguishing between Australian junior volleyball players.¹⁰ Moreover, this is consistent with studies demonstrating the significance of speed and agility in efficient court coverage and quick direction changes in response to the ball's and opponents’ movements.²⁸

Complementing agility and speed, the importance of core strength and stability was strongly emphasised due to its role in biomechanical efficiency, injury prevention, and pain reduction. Coaches linked strong core control to the ability to make “really small changes really quickly” and to “produce power and speed”. While specific research on core functionality in volleyball is limited, these findings resonate previous studies suggesting that a strong and stable core contributes to better balance, enhancing the ability to control body position and reducing the risk of falls or stumbles during play.²⁹

Skill characteristics

In addition to the physical and physiological characteristics, coaches also prioritised two key skill characteristics for TI in volleyball: coordination and spatial awareness/perceptual skills. Motor coordination, especially eye-hand coordination, was identified as crucial with one coach stating, “we use our forearms for the sport, so just that understanding of being able to connect their arm to the ball”. This reflects previous research indicating that elite female volleyballers exhibit superior motor coordination compared to average-level players, likely due to the skill-based nature of the sport.³⁰ However, limited research has been conducted specifically on hand-eye coordination in volleyball and other (team) sports.

Beyond coordination, spatial awareness and perceptual skills were also highlighted as essential characteristics of talented volleyball players. Coaches defined these skills as “the ability to read and understand the situation” and “the awareness of where to be in relation to the ball”. These findings echo literature suggesting that anticipation and situational awareness are more prevalent in volleyball players compared to non-athletes and sprinters.³¹ This can be attributed to the fast-paced and unpredictable nature of volleyball, which demands heightened awareness and quick decision-making.

Role of biomechanics in talent identification: recommended assessments

Finally, the coaches’ perspectives on utilising biomechanics for TI in volleyball revealed two subdomains: basic testing and advanced testing. Some coaches expressed scepticism regarding the impact of biomechanics on the TI process, with one participant questioning: “I don’t see how biomechanics will necessarily help the screen process so much at this level”. Two other participants echoed this sentiment, emphasising their reliance on subjective assessments like the coach's eye. These statements highlight a common tendency in TI across sports, where experiential intuition often prevails over objective data, an issue that is also observed in sports like football, where coaches frequently prioritise subjective judgment over biomechanical insights.^5,32

On the other hand, three coaches recognised the value of basic testing equipment that could be easily repeated across the country, even suggesting something as simple as chalk on the wall. Two of these coaches justified the use of basic testing by adopting an inclusive rather than exclusive TI approach, with one participant stating, “we’re not trying to cut people out, just making sure we don’t lose anyone that we should be including”.

In contrast, five coaches recognised the potential value of biomechanics and identified several areas where biomechanists could enhance the TI process. These included developing a functional measure for core strength, conducting physical screening, analysing general movement patterns across the court, collecting data, and standardising tests across different levels. This demonstrates a willingness to collaborate with biomechanists to increase the effectiveness and objectivity of TI programmes in volleyball. While this view aligns with broader scientific consensus on the relevance of biomechanical parameters in the identification of talented volleyball players, prior studies have primarily focused on testing athletes rather than consulting coaches on how such assessments should be used or interpreted in practice.^26,30,33 For example, Ziv and Lidor emphasised the importance of monitoring vertical jump throughout the season,²⁶ and Pion et al. found motor coordination to be a distinguishing factor among elite youth players.³⁰ More recently, advanced biomechanical analyses using machine learning have shown that kinetic and kinematic variables can meaningfully distinguish movement strategies in elite players, offering insight into performance optimisation and injury prevention.³⁴ However, none of these studies engaged with coaches’ perspectives on the feasibility or application of these tests within real-world TI processes and the integration of objective biomechanical assessments in volleyball TI programmes remains limited and underexplored, indicating a gap in the current practice.³⁵

In response to these insights, two delineated lists of TI assessments for volleyball were formulated: one comprising basic field-based evaluations and another incorporating advanced lab-based biomechanical analyses (Table 3). These recommendations, informed by coaches’ insights and supplemented by existing literature, aim to provide a comprehensive yet accessible framework for identifying and nurturing volleyball talent. These assessment criteria can be used to evaluate training outcomes and for the recruitment of volleyball players. Also given 6 out of 8 participants (80%) participants are both indoor and beach coaches, the criteria can be applied to both settings.

Table 3.

List of recommended assessments for talent identification in volleyball.

Assessment criteria	Field-based assessments	Lab-based assessments
1. Vertical jump	CMJ test (Vertec)	CMJ test (3D motion capture system)
2. Agility, change of direction speed	CODS T-test (timing equipment)	CODS T-test (3D motion capture system)
3. Anthropometrics (arm span, standing reach height)	Kinanthropometry assessment	-
4. Maturity offset	Mirwald equation (sitting/standing height) or SA prediction model (weight/height)	DEXA or X-ray imaging
5. Hand-eye coordination	UGent hand dribbling test (timing equipment)	UGent hand dribbling test (eye-tracking system, motion capture system)
6. Core strength/stability	Sport-specific plank test	Sport-specific plank test (3D motion capture system, EMG)
7. Spatial awareness, perceptual skills	-	3DMOTS test

Note. Abbreviations used: CMJ: Countermovement Jump; CODS: change of direction speed; DEXA: dual-energy X-ray; EMG: electromyography; SA: skeletal age; 3DMOTS: 3-dimensional multiple-object-tracking speed.

Field-based assessments include the Countermovement Jump (CMJ) using a Vertec device for vertical jump performance,³⁶ the Change of Direction Speed (CODS) T-test for agility and change of direction speed,³⁷ anthropometric measurements for standing reach height and arm span, estimation of maturity offset using established equations and a stadiometer,³⁸ assessment of hand-eye coordination with the UGent hand dribbling test,³⁹ and evaluation of core muscle function with the sport-specific plank test.⁴⁰ To our knowledge, there are currently no suitable validated field-based assessments available for evaluating spatial awareness and perceptual skills.

Lab-based assessments encompass the use of a 3-dimensional (3D) motion capture system for detailed analysis of biomechanical variables during CMJ, CODS t-test, and sport-specific plank,⁴¹ electromyography (EMG) for muscle activity assessment during the plank test,⁴² motion capture and eye tracking systems for hand-eye coordination evaluation,⁴³ X-ray imaging and dual-energy X-ray (DEXA) for determining maturity offset and assessing bone mineral content and density,⁴⁴ and the 3-dimensional multiple-object-tracking speed (3DMOTS) test for perceptual skills and spatial awareness.⁴⁵

Together, these assessments provide valuable insights into the physical and biomechanical attributes relevant to TI in volleyball, aiding coaches and talent scouts in making informed decisions.

Strengths and limitations

This study has strengths and limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings and their generalisability. A key strength is that it is the first study to use the NGT to collect insights from highly experienced elite coaches’ perspectives on the most important attributes essential for TI in volleyball. The NGT method is reliable, valid, and encourages diverse viewpoints, discussion, and consensus-building.²⁰ The online format of the NGT meetings offered significant advantages in terms of convenience and flexibility, enabling coaches from different parts of the world to participate without the need for travel. While some aspects of in-person interaction – such as spontaneous dialogue, informal exchanges, and non-verbal communication – were naturally less prominent, the structured nature of the NGT method helped ensure focused engagement and meaningful contributions from all participants. However, since the NGT relies on participants’ subjective rankings, there is a potential for individual biases to influence the prioritisation of characteristics. Personal coaching philosophies and prior experiences may have influenced the rankings, which should be considered when interpreting the results.

In addition, a limitation of the study is the overrepresentation of male coaches, which may have restricted range of perspectives, particularly regarding gender-specific nuances in TI. Furthermore, the gender of the teams coached by the participants was not recorded, and this factor may have influenced the relevance and applicability of the identified characteristics. For example, as the playing characteristics and tactics differ between male and female players, the coaching experience with gender-specific teams could impact how coaches perceive the importance of certain characteristics.⁴⁶ Future studies should aim to incorporate a more diverse panel, including female coaches and experts, as well as consider the gender of the teams coached to gain a more comprehensive understanding.

Moreover, while this study identifies key characteristics for TI, positional differences within the sport must be taken into account. The skillset required for a libero, for instance, significantly differs from that of a middle blocker or outside hitter, highlighting the need for further refinement and position-specific TI models.¹¹

Finally, factors such as team-specific playing styles, coaching philosophies, and the evolution of the game over time may influence the applicability of the identified characteristics. For instance, Aquino and Jolo highlight that holistic, goal-oriented coaching positively influences skill development and personal attributes in volleyball athletes.⁴⁷ While our study focused primarily on physical and perceptual characteristics, this divergence suggests a need to reconcile subjective talent characteristics with biomechanical and physiological data in future TI frameworks. Future research should explore how these variables interact with TI frameworks and assess whether the proposed characteristics remain relevant across different volleyball leagues and levels of play. Despite these limitations, this study provides a valuable foundation for refining TI processes in volleyball, contributing to more effective scouting, selection, and player development strategies.

Future implications

Our findings establish a foundation for the development of standardised and evidence-based TI assessments, enabling coaches, talent scouts, and researchers to systematically identify skilled volleyball players through recommended laboratory-based and field-based biomechanics assessments (Table 3). Implementing standardised, field-based assessments offers a more data-driven and consistent approach to identifying talented players. Additionally, the integration of advanced biomechanical tools for TI in volleyball can provide more detailed insights into players’ physical attributes and movement patterns, although these methods require greater resources and infrastructure.

By continuously refining and validating the physical domain of the EMTD framework presented in this study, more systematic, equitable, and effective TI strategies in volleyball can be achieved. Longitudinal studies are required to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of implementing these characteristics and assessments tools in TI programmes. Future studies could explore larger and more diverse datasets, integrating objective performance metrics (e.g., match statistics, physical testing) to evaluate the validity, reliability, and predictive ability of these assessments. Furthermore, other domains of the EMTD should be considered for a holistic approach to TI, this includes psychological factors such as motivation, resilience, and cognitive.

Conclusion

The current landscape of TI in volleyball predominantly relies on coaches’ subjective insights, leading to inconsistent and ambiguous definitions of talent.⁵ This study addresses this challenge by developing a more structured and objective TI framework, integrating insights from elite coaches and biomechanical expertise. Elaborating on the EMTD model, nine key anthropometric, physiological, and skill-related characteristics were identified by elite coaches as essential for identifying talented adolescent volleyball players. Additionally, a list of recommended assessments was consolidated, offering practical, evidence-based tools to enhance and standardise the TI process in volleyball.

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-1-spo-10.1177_17479541251359875 - Supplemental material for Exploring the essential characteristics for talent identification in volleyball: Insights from elite coaches *

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-spo-10.1177_17479541251359875 for Exploring the essential characteristics for talent identification in volleyball: Insights from elite coaches * by Esmee E Beldman, Sharon MH Tsang, Sarah M Dennis, Samuel L Halley, Chen Liu, Sienna JX Liu, Ping Zhang and Allan CL Fu in International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-2-spo-10.1177_17479541251359875 - Supplemental material for Exploring the essential characteristics for talent identification in volleyball: Insights from elite coaches *

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-2-spo-10.1177_17479541251359875 for Exploring the essential characteristics for talent identification in volleyball: Insights from elite coaches * by Esmee E Beldman, Sharon MH Tsang, Sarah M Dennis, Samuel L Halley, Chen Liu, Sienna JX Liu, Ping Zhang and Allan CL Fu in International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-3-spo-10.1177_17479541251359875 - Supplemental material for Exploring the essential characteristics for talent identification in volleyball: Insights from elite coaches *

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-3-spo-10.1177_17479541251359875 for Exploring the essential characteristics for talent identification in volleyball: Insights from elite coaches * by Esmee E Beldman, Sharon MH Tsang, Sarah M Dennis, Samuel L Halley, Chen Liu, Sienna JX Liu, Ping Zhang and Allan CL Fu in International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors extend their heartfelt gratitude to the following elite volleyball coaches for their invaluable contributions to this study: Phil Borgeaud, Boris Georgieff, Alexis Lebedew, Nikola Dimitrov, Dave Preston, Paul Smith, Martin Suan, and Chris Todd.

Author contributions

Esmee E. Beldman: Involved in the conceptualisation and design of the work. Contributed to the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data. Engaged in both drafting and reviewing the work critically. Gave final approval for the version to be published.

Sharon MH Tsang: Involved in the conceptualisation and design of the work. Contributed to the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data. Engaged in both drafting and reviewing the work critically. Gave final approval for the version to be published.

Sarah M Dennis: Engaged in data analysis and interpretation. Actively reviewed the work critically. Provided final approval for the version to be published.

Samuel L. Halley: Engaged in data acquisition and took part in the critical review of the work. Provided final approval for the version to be published.

Chen Liu: Engaged in data acquisition and took part in the critical review of the work. Provided final approval for the version to be published.

Sienna JX Liu: Engaged in data acquisition and took part in the critical review of the work. Provided final approval for the version to be published.

Ping Zhang: Contributed to data interpretation and took part in the critical review of the work. Provided final approval for the version to be published.

Allan CL Fu: Involved in the conceptualisation and design of the work. Contributed to the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data. Engaged in both drafting and reviewing the work critically. Gave final approval for the version to be published.

Ethical considerations

Ethics was approved by the university's Human Ethics Committee (reference number 2022/616) in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki prior to the study. The study complies with the international ethical standards aligned with the declaration of Helsinki, as noted by Harriss et al.³¹ The trial procedure adhered to the SPIRIT Checklist.³² Furthermore, this study was reviewed and approved by the Tishreen University Ethics Committee Review Board under approval number 4406.³³

Consent to participate

Informed consent to participate in this study was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Consent was provided in written form, as approved by the Ethics Committee Review Board.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Declaration of conflict of interest

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Esmee E Beldman

Sharon MH Tsang

Sarah M Dennis

Samuel L Halley

Chen Liu

Sienna JX Liu

Ping Zhang

Allan CL Fu

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Barraclough

Till

Kerr

, et al. Methodological approaches to talent identification in team sports: a narrative review. Sports (Basel) 2022; 10: 81.

Baker

Wilson

Johnston

, et al. Talent research in sport 1990–2018: a scoping review. Front Psychol 2020; 11: 607710.

Chulani

Gordon

. Adolescent growth and development. Prim Care 2014; 41: 465–487.

Gagné

. The DMGT: changes within, beneath, and beyond. Talent Dev Excell 2013; 5: 5–19.

Roberts

Greenwood

Stanley

, et al. Coach knowledge in talent identification: a systematic review and meta-synthesis. J Sci Med Sport 2019; 22: 1163–1172.

Lethole

Kubayi

Toriola

, et al. ‘Goalkeepers are players too': key attributes coaches’ look for in talented youth soccer goalkeepers. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil 2024; 16: 210.

Larkin

O’Connor

. Talent identification and recruitment in youth soccer: recruiter's perceptions of the key attributes for player recruitment. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0175716.

Robertson

Pion

Mostaert

, et al. A coaches’ perspective on the contribution of anthropometry, physical performance, and motor coordination in racquet sports. J Sports Sci 2018; 36: 2706–2715.

Stamm

Thomson

. Role of adolescent female volleyball players’ psychophysiological properties and body build in performance of different elements of the game. Percept Mot Skills 2005; 101: 108–120.

10.

Gabbett

Georgieff

. Physiological and anthropometric characteristics of Australian junior national, state, and novice volleyball players. J Strength Cond Res 2007; 21: 902–908.

11.

Toselli

Campa

. Anthropometry and functional movement patterns in elite male volleyball players of different competitive levels. J Strength Cond Res 2018; 32: 2601–2611.

12.

Schaal

Ransdell

Simonson

, et al. Physiologic performance test differences in female volleyball athletes by competition level and player position. J Strength Cond Res 2013; 27: 1841–1850.

13.

Cabral

BGdAT

Cabral

SdAT

Batista

, et al. Somatotype and anthropometry in Brazilian national volleyball teams/somatotipia e antropometria na selecao brasileira de voleibol. Motricidade. 2008; 4: 67+.

14.

Pawlik

Dziubek

Rogowski

, et al. Strength abilities and serve reception efficiency of youth female volleyball players. Appl Bionics Biomech 2022; 2022: 4328761.

15.

Albaladejo-Saura

Vaquero-Cristóbal

García-Roca

, et al. Influence of biological maturation status on selected anthropometric and physical fitness variables in adolescent male volleyball players. PeerJ 2022; 10: e13216.

16.

Serrien

Baeyens

. Systematic review and meta-analysis on proximal-to-distal sequencing in team handball: prospects for talent detection? J Hum Kinet 2018; 63: 9–21.

17.

Fernandes

JFT

Arede

Clarke

, et al. Kinetic and kinematic assessment of the band-assisted countermovement jump. J Strength Cond Res 2023; 37: 1588–1593.

18.

Wackwitz

Minahan

Lievens

, et al. Muscle-fiber typology is associated with sprint-cycling characteristics in world-class and elite track cyclists. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2024; 20: 142–148.

19.

Bournival

Martini

Trudeau

, et al. The science and art of testing in ice hockey: a systematic review of twenty years of research. Front Sports Act Living 2023; 5: 1252093.

20.

McMillan

Kelly

Sav

, et al. Using the nominal group technique: how to analyse across multiple groups. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol 2014; 14: 92–108.

21.

Noori

Sadeghi

. Designing smart model in volleyball talent identification via fuzzy logic based on main and weighted criteria resulted from the analytic hierarchy process. J Adv Sport Technol 2017; 1: 16–24.

22.

Stamm

Jairus

, et al.

Do height and weight play an important role in block and attack efficiency in high-level men's volleyball?

Papers Anthropol 2017; 26: 64.

23.

Pocek

Milosevic

Lakicevic

, et al. Anthropometric characteristics and vertical jump abilities by player position and performance level of junior female volleyball players. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021; 18: 8377.

24.

Nevill

Negra

Myers

, et al.

Are early or late maturers likely to be fitter in the general population?

Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021; 18: 497.

25.

Das

Roy

Let

, et al. Investigation of relationship of strength and size of different body parts to velocity of volleyball serve and spike. IOSR J Sports Phys Educ 2015; 2: 18–22.

26.

Ziv

Lidor

. Vertical jump in female and male volleyball players: a review of observational and experimental studies. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2010; 20: 556–567.

27.

Bellinger

Bourne

Duhig

, et al. Relationships between lower limb muscle characteristics and force-velocity profiles derived during sprinting and jumping. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2021; 53: 1400–1411.

28.

Sahin

. Relationships between acceleration, agility, and jumping ability in female volleyball players. Eur J Exp Biol 2014; 21: 1192–1196.

29.

Barrio

Ramirez-Campillo

Garcia de Alcaraz Serrano

, et al. Effects of core training on dynamic balance stability: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sports Sci 2022; 40: 1815–1823.

30.

Pion

Fransen

Deprez

, et al. Stature and jumping height are required in female volleyball, but motor coordination is a key factor for future elite success. J Strength Cond Res 2015; 29: 1480–1485.

31.

Nuri

Shadmehr

Ghotbi

, et al. Reaction time and anticipatory skill of athletes in open and closed skill-dominated sport. Eur J Sport Sci 2013; 13: 431–436.

32.

Christensen

. “An eye for talent”: talent identification and the “practical sense” of top-level soccer coaches. Sociol Sport J 2009; 26: 365–382. Retrieved Mar 15, 2025

33.

Marinho

Chagas

. Can motor coordination level predict performance on volleyball skills in youth? Retos 2022; 45: 195–201.

34.

Mercado-Palomino

Aragón-Royón

Richards

, et al. The influence of limb role, direction of movement and limb dominance on movement strategies during block jump-landings in volleyball. Sci Rep 2021; 11: 23668.

35.

Lidor

Côté

Hackfort

. ISSP Position stand: to test or not to test? The use of physical skill tests in talent detection and in early phases of sport development. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol 2009; 7: 131–146.

36.

Nuzzo

Anning

Scharfenberg

. The reliability of three devices used for measuring vertical jump height. J Strength Cond Res 2011; 25: 2580–2590.

37.

Stewart

Turner

Miller

. Reliability, factorial validity, and interrelationships of five commonly used change of direction speed tests. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2014; 24: 500–506.

38.

Mirwald

Baxter-Jones

Bailey

, et al. An assessment of maturity from anthropometric measurements. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2002; 34: 689–694.

39.

Pion

. The Flemish Sports Compass From sports orientation to elite performance predicition. 2015.

40.

Tong

Nie

. Sport-specific endurance plank test for evaluation of global core muscle function. Phys Ther Sport 2014; 15: 58–63.

41.

Winter

. Three-dimensional kinematics and kinetics. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. New York: NY: John Wiley & Sons, 2009, pp. 176–199.

42.

Lee

. The relationship of trunk muscle activation and core stability: a biomechanical analysis of pilates-based stabilization exercise. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021; 18: 12804.

43.

Williams

Chapman

Pilarski

, et al. Gaze and movement assessment (GaMA): inter-site validation of a visuomotor upper limb functional protocol. PLoS One 2019; 14: e0219333.

44.

Lloyd

Oliver

Faigenbaum

, et al. Chronological age vs. biological maturation: implications for exercise programming in youth. J Strength Cond Res 2014; 28: 1454–1464.

45.

Faubert

Sidebottom

. Perceptual-cognitive training of athletes. J Clin Sport Psychol 2012; 6: 85–102.

46.

Koch

Tilp

. Beach volleyball techniques and tactics: a comparison of male and female playing characteristics. Kinesiology 2009; 41: 52–59.

47.

Aquino

JMD

Jolo

. Holistic coaching style on personal attributes and proficiency of volleyball athletes. J Sport Area 2024; 9: 340–356.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.12 MB

0.41 MB

0.10 MB