Corrigendum to “Beyond visual fixations and gaze behaviour. Using pupillometry to examine the mechanisms in the planning and motor performance of a golf putt” [Human Movement Science 71 (2020) 102622] (Human Movement Science (2020) 71, (S0167945719307195), (10.1016/j.humov.2020.102622))

The authors regret: Whilst our initial analysis of visual data was undertaken with good intention, we have noted an error which specifically relates to the management of individual trials data within the analysis as highlighted in our reported degrees of freedom. Analysis relating to visual search data under Section 3.2 should acknowledge that average group data was not used in the analysis, but individual trial data has been included as a between-person rather than a within-person factor. Reanalysis of the data to correct this error is reported below. There were no changes to the main outcomes reported. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. 3.2.1 Fixation Count ANOVA revealed a significant interaction between putting condition and skill level on fixation count, F^(2,24) = 4.29, p = .03, η_p² = 0.26. There was a statistically significant difference in fixation count between skill levels on the RL putting condition F^(1,12) = 6.79, p = .02, η_p² = 0.36 and LR putting condition F^(1,12) = 5.06, p = .04, η_p² = 0.30 (Fig. 1). There was no statistically significant difference in fixation count between skill levels on the ST putting condition F^(1,12) = 0.20, p = .67, η_p² = 0.02. There was no statistically significant effect of putting condition on fixation count for the HHG F^(2,12) = 0.06, p = .94, η_p² = 0.01. There was a statistically significant effect of putting condition on fixation count for the LHG F^(2,12) = 10.584, p = .002, η_p² = 0.64. LHG had significantly more fixations for the RL (M = 19.519, SD 1.70) and LR (M = 19.979, SE 1.94) than the ST putting condition (M = 16.089, SE 2.22). 3.2.2 Fixation Duration ANOVA revealed a significant interaction between putting condition and skill level on fixation duration, F^(2,24) = 4.85, p = .02, η_p² = 0.29. There was a statistically significant difference in fixation duration between skill levels on the RL putting condition F^(1,12) = 7.716, p = .02, η_p² = 39, on the ST putting condition F^(1,12) = 12.984, p = .004, η_p² = 0.52 and on the LR putting condition, F^(1,12) = 5.003, p = .045, η_p² = 0.29 (Fig. 1). There was no statistically significant effect of putting condition on fixation duration for the HHG F^(2,12) = 0.03, p = .97, η_p² = 0.01. There was a statistically significant effect of putting condition on fixation duration for the LHG F^(1.03,6.20) = 7.23, p = .03, η_p² = 0.55 (with Greenhours-Giesser corrections). However, post-hoc analysis did not reveal significant differences between conditions. The LHG had similar fixation durations for the RL (M = 452.47 ms, SE 36.50) and LR (M = 448.83 ms, SE 34.41) which were shorter than the ST putting condition (M = 560.65 ms, SE 62.84). 3.2.3 Fixation Count to AOI There was a statistically significant simple two-way interaction between putting condition and fixation count to AOI for both HHG, F^(8,48) = 6.09, p < .001, η_p² = 0.50 and LHG, F^(8,48) = 4.25, p = .001, ηp² = 0.42, (Table 1). There was a statistically significant simple main effect of condition for both HHG, F^(4,24) = 18.657, p < .001 and LHG F^(4,24) = 17.921, p < .001 on fixation count on the RL putting condition. 3.4 QE Duration There was no statistically significant interaction between skill level and putting condition on changes in mean pupil dilation from baseline during the QE period, F^(2,24) = 1.107, p = .35, η_p² = 0.08. The main effect of putting condition was not statistically significant, F^(2,24) = 2.103, p = .14, η_p² = 0.015. Similarly the main effect of skill level was not statistically significant, F^(1,12) = 2.688, p = .13, partial η² = 0.18, (Fig. 2). 3.4.1 Change in Pupil Dilation There was no statistically significant interaction between skill level and putting condition on changes in mean pupil dilation from baseline, F^(2,24) = 0.11, p = .99, η_p² = 0.003. ANOVA revealed that the main effect of skill level showed a statistically significant difference in the percentage change in mean pupil diameter from baseline, F^(1,12) = 5.27, p = .04, η_p² = 0.31 between LHG and HHG. Data are mean ± standard error, unless otherwise stated. The marginal means for changes in pupil diameter from baseline were − 2.341 mm ± 0.707 for LHG and − 4.636 mm ± 0.707 for HHG, a statistically significant mean difference of 2.295 (95% CI, 0.117 to 4.473), p = .04, (Fig. 2). 3.4.2 Change in Pupil Dilation during QE There was no statistically significant interaction between skill level and putting condition on changes in mean pupil dilation from baseline during the QE period, F^(2,24) = 1.173, p = .33, η_p² = 0.09. The main effect of putting condition was not statistically significant, F^(2,24) = 0.898, p = .421, η_p² = 0.07. Similarly the main effect of skill level was not statistically significant, F^(1,12) = 0.032, p = .862, partial η² = 0.003, (Fig. 2). The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.