Search

Purpose: The objectives of the present study were to analyze the relationship between psychological variables (self-esteem, anxiety and self-confidence) assessed before the competition and physical and physiological responses demonstrated during the competition in soccer referees and to compare these psychophysical and physiological responses by category (CAT; national and non-national). Method: A total of 153 soccer referees participated (age Mage = 23.2; SD = 4.8 years; experience Mage = 6.0; SD = 4.5 years) in the study. The CSAI-2 and Rosenberg questionnaires were conducted before the match, and match performance data were collected using GPS devices. Results: The results showed significant differences in self-esteem and self-confidence across CATs (p <.001; d >.84). The national referees had higher psychological and physical-physiological responses (mean and maximum heart rate) Some correlations were observed among the psychophysical and physiological responses, CAT and age, demonstrating that the age could explain up to 48.4% of the variance the referee CAT (p <.001) and this CAT could explain self-esteem, anxiety and self-confidence by up to 20% of the variance. Conclusions: national referees presented better psychological responses prior to the competition, and also obtained greater physical and physiological records, which could be translated into a better position on the pitch in conflicting plays in order to make a right and just decision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: While sleep research in athletes is extensive, no research has investigated sleep in sports officials during a competitive season. This study explored the (a) self-reported quantity and quality of sleep obtained by sports officials according to the time of competition (day or evening) and (b) impact of reduced sleep on perceived decision-making ability. Design: Sports officials (n = 371) from various sporting codes completed an online questionnaire that evaluated self-reported sleep quantity and quality on habitual nights, before competition, and after competition, as well as perceived decision-making constructs. Results: With sleep restriction defined as less than 7 h of sleep, mixed-effects logistic regression revealed that the estimated probability of reporting reduced sleep quantity increased (p< .05) on habitual nights (0.58), before competition (0.48), and after competition (0.56). The estimated probability of reporting poor sleep quality was 0.01--0.04 across all nights. When considering time of competition (day or evening), reduced sleep quantity was experienced after evening competition (odds ratio [OR] = 3.33, p < .05), while poorer sleep quality (p< .05) was experienced following day (OR = 2.1) and evening (OR = 12.46) competition compared to habitual nights. Furthermore, the impact of reduced sleep on perceived decision-making constructs was negative, with the estimated probability of reporting impaired perceived decision-making between 0.13 and 0.21. Conclusion: Overall, sports officials are vulnerable to reduced quantity and quality of sleep before and after competition, with impaired perceived decision-making ability following nights of less than average sleep. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peer review of scholarship is essential to journal quality, evidence, knowledge advancement, and application of that knowledge in any field. This commentary summarizes recent literature on issues related to peer-review quality and current review practice in kinesiology and provides recommendations to improve peer review in kinesiology journals. We reviewed the literature on the characteristics of peer review in scientific journals and describe the status of peer review in kinesiology journals. Although the majority of scholars and editors strongly support the peer-review process, systematic research in several disciplines has shown somewhat positive but mixed results for the efficacy of peer review in evaluating the quality of and improving research reports. Past recommendations for improvement have focused on agreement between reviewers, standards for evaluating quality, and clarification of the editorial team roles. Research on interventions, however, indicates that improving reviewer performance is difficult. The specific research on peer review in kinesiology is limited. Six recommendations to improve peer review are proposed: publishing clear evaluation standards, establishing collaborative evaluation procedures and editorial team roles, utilizing online submission data to help improve reviewer comments, creating author appeals procedures, protecting reviewer time commitments, and improving reviewer recognition. There is considerable variation in peer-review criteria and procedures in kinesiology, and implementing several reasonable improvements may advance knowledge development and the field of kinesiology. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In this study, we examined attention processes in complex, sport-specific decision-making tasks without interdependencies from anticipation. Psychophysiological and performance data recorded from advanced and intermediate level basketball referees were compared. Event-related potentials obtained while judging game situations in foul recognition and a control task provided insight into focus of attention, selective attention, and processing strategy (top-down vs. bottom-up). Results showed task-specific effects for advanced referees in components influenced by attentional focus and selective attention. Experts also seemed to profit from superior top-down strategy and were able to evaluate the stimuli more rapidly. These findings are discussed in connection with current models in neurosciences and theories of referee research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]