TY - JOUR
T1 - Information Acquisition Differences between Experienced and Novice Time Trial Cyclists
AU - Boya, Manhal
AU - Foulsham, Tom
AU - Hettinge, Florentina
AU - Parry, David
AU - Williams, Emily
AU - Jones, Hollie
AU - Sparks, Andy
AU - Marchant, David
AU - Ellison, Paul
AU - Bridge, Craig
AU - McNaughton, Lars
AU - Micklewright, Dominic
PY - 2017/9/1
Y1 - 2017/9/1
N2 - Purpose To use eye-tracking technology to directly compare information acquisition behavior of experienced and novice cyclists during a self-paced, 10-mile (16.1 km) time trial (TT). Method Two groups of novice (n = 10) and experienced cyclists (n = 10) performed a 10-mile self-paced TT on two separate occasions during which a number of feedback variables (speed, distance, power output, cadence, HR, and time) were projected within their view. A large RPE scale was also presented next to the projected information and participants. Participants were fitted with a head-mounted eye tracker and HR monitor. Results Experienced cyclists performed both TT quicker than novices (F1,18 = 6.8, P = 0.018) during which they primarily looked at speed (9 of 10 participants), whereas novices primarily looked at distance (6 of 10 participants). Experienced cyclists looked at primary information for longer than novices across the whole TT (24.5% ± 4.2% vs 34.2% ± 6.1%; t18 = 4.2; P <0.001) and less frequently than novices during the last quarter of the TT (49 ± 19 vs 80 ± 32; t18 = -2.6; P = 0.009). The most common combination of primary and secondary information looked at by experienced cyclists was speed and distance, respectively. Looking at 10 different primary-secondary feedback permutations, the novices were less consistent than the experienced cyclists in their information acquisition behavior. Conclusions This study challenges the importance placed on knowledge of the endpoint to pacing in previous models, especially for experienced cyclists for whom distance feedback was looked at secondary to, but in conjunction with, information about speed. Novice cyclists have a greater dependence on distance feedback, which they look at for shorter and more frequent periods than the experienced cyclists. Experienced cyclists are more selective and consistent in attention to feedback during TT cycling.
AB - Purpose To use eye-tracking technology to directly compare information acquisition behavior of experienced and novice cyclists during a self-paced, 10-mile (16.1 km) time trial (TT). Method Two groups of novice (n = 10) and experienced cyclists (n = 10) performed a 10-mile self-paced TT on two separate occasions during which a number of feedback variables (speed, distance, power output, cadence, HR, and time) were projected within their view. A large RPE scale was also presented next to the projected information and participants. Participants were fitted with a head-mounted eye tracker and HR monitor. Results Experienced cyclists performed both TT quicker than novices (F1,18 = 6.8, P = 0.018) during which they primarily looked at speed (9 of 10 participants), whereas novices primarily looked at distance (6 of 10 participants). Experienced cyclists looked at primary information for longer than novices across the whole TT (24.5% ± 4.2% vs 34.2% ± 6.1%; t18 = 4.2; P <0.001) and less frequently than novices during the last quarter of the TT (49 ± 19 vs 80 ± 32; t18 = -2.6; P = 0.009). The most common combination of primary and secondary information looked at by experienced cyclists was speed and distance, respectively. Looking at 10 different primary-secondary feedback permutations, the novices were less consistent than the experienced cyclists in their information acquisition behavior. Conclusions This study challenges the importance placed on knowledge of the endpoint to pacing in previous models, especially for experienced cyclists for whom distance feedback was looked at secondary to, but in conjunction with, information about speed. Novice cyclists have a greater dependence on distance feedback, which they look at for shorter and more frequent periods than the experienced cyclists. Experienced cyclists are more selective and consistent in attention to feedback during TT cycling.
KW - Performance
KW - Pacing
KW - Cycling
KW - Vision
KW - Cognition
KW - Decision
KW - DECISION
KW - VISION
KW - PERFORMANCE
KW - CYCLING
KW - PACING
KW - COGNITION
UR - http://www.acsm.org/public-information/acsm-journals/medicine-science-in-sports-exercise
U2 - 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001304
DO - 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001304
M3 - Article (journal)
SN - 0195-9131
VL - 49
SP - 1884
EP - 1898
JO - Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise
JF - Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise
IS - 9
ER -