University of South Florida
Scholar Commons
Graduate Theses and Dissertations
Graduate School
June 2016
Using Expert Modeling and Video Feedback to
Improve Starting Block Execution with Track and
Field Sprinters
April Dyal
University of South Florida, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd
Part of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons
Scholar Commons Citation
Dyal, April, "Using Expert Modeling and Video Feedback to Improve Starting Block Execution with Track and Field Sprinters"
(2016). Graduate Theses and Dissertations.
http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/6229
This is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and
Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected].
Using Expert Modeling and Video Feedback to Improve Starting Block Execution with Track
and Field Sprinters
by
April Dyal
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in Applied Behavior Analysis
Department of Child and Family Studies
College of Behavioral and Community Sciences
University of South Florida
Major Professor: Raymond Miltenberger, Ph.D.
Kimberly Crosland, Ph.D.
Sarah Bloom Ph.D.
Date of Approval:
June 23, 2016
Keywords: Expert modeling, sports performance, track and field, video feedback
Copyright © 2016, April Dyal
Table of Contents
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ iii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... iv
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... v
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
Chapter 2: Methods ......................................................................................................................... 5
Participants & Setting ......................................................................................................... 5
Materials ............................................................................................................................. 5
Target Behaviors and Data Collection ................................................................................ 6
Interobserver Agreement ........................................................................................ 7
Social Validity ........................................................................................................ 8
Treatment Integrity ................................................................................................. 8
Experimental Design ........................................................................................................... 9
Procedures ........................................................................................................................... 9
Baseline ................................................................................................................... 9
Video modeling and video feedback..................................................................... 10
Follow up ............................................................................................................. 11
Chapter 3: Results ......................................................................................................................... 12
Social validity ................................................................................................................... 13
Chapter 4: Discussion ................................................................................................................... 16
References ..................................................................................................................................... 21
Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 28
Appendix A: Task Analysis for Starting Block Formation .............................................. 28
Appendix B: Social Validity Questionnaire-Coach .......................................................... 30
Appendix C: Social Validity-Athlete ................................................................................ 31
Appendix D: Treatment Integrity Form ............................................................................ 32
ii
Appendix E: USF IRB Letter of Approval ....................................................................... 33
iii
List of Tables
Table 1:
Participants Social Validity Questionnaire Results .............................................. 15
Table 2:
Head Coach Social Validity Questionnaire Results ............................................. 15
iv
List of Figures
Figure 1:
Graph for Participants ........................................................................................... 14
v
Abstract
Correct formation during starting block execution is important for injury prevention and
obtaining maximum velocity during the sprint. Researchers in applied behavior analysis have
evaluated several procedures to improve performance in sports such as gymnastics, football, and,
golf. A promising method to improve sports performance is expert modeling plus video
feedback. However, there is little research on this method and it has yet to be evaluated with
sprinters in track and field. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness
of expert modeling and video feedback to improve form during block starts with track and field
sprinters. Results revealed marked improvement from baseline to intervention across all four
participants that was maintained at follow-up.
vi
Chapter 1:
Introduction
In track and field, sprint starts are carried out in a number of ways including the standing
start, crouched start, or block start. According to Haugen, Tonnessen, and Seiler (2012), the
block start is one of the most effective ways to gain maximum velocity as quickly as possible
during sprint starts. The block start is one of the most difficult forms for a sprinter to execute
because it requires a series of complex movements, as the body of the sprinter must be at specific
angles to most effectively utilize the starting block apparatus and obtain utmost momentum.
A block start involves an apparatus referred to as a starting block. It has two wedges,
called pedals attached to a rod. The pedals serve as secured objects for the sprinter to push off,
creating a means for quick acceleration. Starting block formation involves a number of complex
motions in which the body is positioned in specific angles and the start is executed in one fluid
motion. The block start can be broken down into three distinct phases: bunched phase, drive
phase, and acceleration phase. During the bunched phase the sprinter is down on his or her hands
and knees with feet pressed against block pedals. This phase is critical because the hands, feet,
and legs must be in the suggested position to allow for optimal push off from the starting blocks.
Once in the drive phase, the sprinter uses the force applied to the blocks and is positioned in a
horizontal body stance. In this phase, the sprinters’ body is in the recommended angles to obtain
maximum velocity and to prevent injury. Acceleration, the final phase of the block start, begins
after the first two steps out of the blocks and ends 10 to 12 steps into the race. At the end of this
1
phase the sprinter is running in an upward position with knees high (Amneus et al., 2012;
Cowburn, 2005; Lee, 2007, 2014; Thomas, n.d.).
Behavioral procedures have been effective in improving skill execution in sports such as
football (Luiselli, Woods, & Reed, 2011; Reed, Critchfield, & Martens, 2006; Smith & Ward,
2006; Stokes & Luiselli, 2010), dance (Fitterling & Ayllon, 1983; Quinn, Miltenberger, & Fogel,
2015), gymnastics (Baudry, Leroy, & Chollet, 2006; Boyer, Miltenberger, Batsche, & Fogel,
2009), baseball (Osborne, Rudrud, & Zezoney, 1990); basketball (Kladopoulos & McComas,
2001; Romanowich, Bourret, & Vollmer, 2007), swimming (Dowrick & Dove, 1980; Hazen,
Johnstone, Martin, & Srikameswaran, 1990; Hume & Grossman, 1992), figure skating (Ming &
Martin, 1996), ice hockey (Rogerson & Hrycaiko, 2002), golf (Guadagnoli, Holcomb, & Davis,
2002), track and field (Maryam, Yaghob, Darush, & Mojtaba, 2009; Shapiro & Shapiro, 1985),
and tennis (Allison & Ayllon, 1980). A number of methods such as instruction, modeling, public
posting (Brobst & Ward, 2002; Ward & Carnes, 2002), goal setting (Ward & Carnes, 2002)
motion detection systems (Angelescu & Reske, 2006) and various forms of feedback (Boyer et
al., 2009; Quinn et al., 2015) have been used in the field of applied behavior analysis to enhance
athletic performance.
Performance film is widely used in athletics as a method of feedback to improve player’s
performance. It involves video recording an athlete performing a skill and playing it back while
providing positive and corrective verbal feedback on the performance. This method of feedback
has only been demonstrated as effective in a handful of sports such as martial arts (Benitez
Santiago & Miltenberger, 2016), yoga (Downs, Miltenberger, Biedronski, & Witherspoon,
2
2015), horseback riding (Kelley & Miltenberger, 2016), and tennis (Van Wieringen, Emmen,
Bootsma, Hoogesteger, & Whiting, 1989).
Hazen et al. (1990) compared a standard coaching method with video feedback to
improve swimmers’ performance of two swimming strokes, the freestyle and the backstroke
racing turn. Each swimming stroke was assessed using a task analysis breaking down the
components in each skill and marking each component as correctly or incorrectly performed.
Employing a multiple baseline across participants, the results demonstrated that video feedback
was more effective than standard coaching across all participants. Furthermore, in the follow-up
phase, two out of the three participants maintained the skill improvement.
Guadagnoli et al. (2002) evaluated golf swing performance with 30 golfers who were
randomly assigned to one of three groups: a video, verbal, or self-guided instruction. Each
participant hit 15 golf balls with a 7-iron club consecutively in all phases. Results revealed that
the verbal and video feedback groups showed improvement in the targeted skill during follow-up
but the self-guided group did not. Furthermore, data indicated that the video-feedback group
showed the most improvement in skill performance.
In some studies expert modeling has been added to video feedback to improve complex
athletic performance (e.g. Boyer et al., 2009; Rikli & Smith, 1980). Expert modeling involves
video recording of an elite performer executing a specific skill and showing the performance to
the athlete to prompt correct execution of the skill. When combined, video modeling can show
the athlete the expected performance and video feedback can provide reinforcement when with
athlete achieves or approximates the behavior shown in the video or provide correction so the
athlete can more closely match the modeled performance.
3
Rikli and Smith (1980) used expert modeling with video feedback to improve tennis
serving form. The study compared three feedback groups with a control. The feedback groups
received expert modeling and video feedback either the first day of instruction (early group), on
the third day of instruction (mid-instruction group), or both the first day and third day
(combination group). The control group did not receive feedback on their performance. During
each video feedback session, the participant performed the skill followed by an opportunity to
compare his or her performance with a video recording of an expert model executing the skill
side-by-side. Results revealed the three feedback groups showed a significant improvement in
serving form as compared to the control but did not differ from each other. These findings
indicate that expert modeling and video feedback is an effective treatment package for improving
performance of tennis serving form.
Boyer et al. (2009) also used expert modeling with video feedback to enhance the
performance of three gymnastic skills - the kip cast, giant, and clear hip circle. Results showed
improved skill performances across all participants in the three skills during video modeling and
feedback phases. Moreover, the skills maintained over time for all of the participants. Overall,
the results indicated that expert modeling and video feedback were more effective than typical
practice and coaching alone for teaching a complex skill.
Because expert modeling and video feedback have been shown to be effective in
improving skill acquisition in sport performance in only two studies and because the procedure
has yet to be evaluated with starting block formation of track and field sprinters, more research is
needed. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine the use of expert modeling plus video
feedback to improve starting block formation with track and field sprinters.
4
Chapter 2:
Methods
Participants and Setting
Four sprinters, age 12 to13-years-old, participated in the study. Alex, a 13-year old girl,
had been running track for 3 years. She ran the 200-meters and the 400-meters. Lindsey, a 12year old girl, had been running for 5 years. She ran in the hurdles, 200-meters, and long jump.
Lauren, a 13-year old girl, had been running for 2 years. She ran the 200-meters, 200-meter
hurdles, 400-meters, and long jump. Alison, a 13-year old girl, had been running for 2 years. She
ran in the 100-meters, 200-meters, 400-metters, and high jump. The study was conducted on a
track where the participants usually practice track and field during regularly scheduled practice
times 3 days a week for 2 hours each practice. All participants were recruited from a local track
and field traveling team that participates at local, regional, state and national level meets. A flyer
was given to all sprinters on the team for recruiting purposes. A criterion to participate included
experience running in the 100-meters and/or the 200-meters sprints either during practices and/or
during competitions as well as experience with block starts. Each participant was evaluated on
the percentage of steps correct using a task analysis and was required to score 80% or less to
participant in the study. Any participant that did not meet recruiting requirements was not
included in the study.
5
Materials
The materials used for this study include an iPad® second generation for video recording
with software to present participants’ performance. The Dartfish® application downloaded from
the Apple® app store provided the means to display side-by-side video with an expert model
video, viewings of all recorded videos in slow motion, and visually display angels in degrees.
Two expert modeling videos were selected from YouTube® video database, one of a female
USA gold medalist sprinter, Sanya Richards-Ross, and the second of a male Jamaican gold
medalist sprinter, Asafa Powell. The female expert model was chosen to serve as the expert
model due to the rapport built with the participants when they met her previously and the male
model was chosen to ensure all necessary angles in the three phases could be clearly viewed.
One video displayed a slow motion view and the other in regular speed. The BrainMac® Sports
Coach starting block calculator was used to determine participant’s block setting (Mackenzie,
2001). BrainMac® block calculator uses the angles of the legs in the starting block position (i.e.,
120 and 90 degrees) along with specific measurements of the runner and mathematical
calculations to individualize pedal block settings. A Canon® VIXIA HF M500 video camera and
tripod was used to record each participant’s session for treatment integrity. Lastly, an 18-step
task analysis was created by reviewing literature on the block start positions (Cowburn, 2005;
Lee, 2007, 2014; Rosenbaum, n.d.; Thomas, n.d.) and breaking the skill down into observable
and measureable steps. University of South Florida men’s head sprinting coach with more than 5
years of coaching at a college-elite level and 727 Track Club head coach with more than 10 years
of coaching experience at the elite level viewed the task analysis and validated each step.
6
Targets Behaviors and Data Collection
The dependent variable was number of correct steps completed during starting block
execution (see appendix A). For example, in the set position hips should rise slightly to the
position above shoulders, head and neck in line with the spine, shoulders vertical or slightly
forward of hands, front leg knee at a 90 to 99 degree angle, rear leg knee at a 120 to 130 degree
angle, and feet firmly pressed against the block pedal. Data were collected via video recording
using the 18-item task analysis and reported as the percentage of correct steps completed. This
was done by reviewing each attempt in slow motion and marking yes or no on the task analysis.
“Yes” was marked if the participant performed the step correctly and “no” was marked if the
participant performed the step incorrectly. This process was performed for each participant after
each session was completed during baseline and intervention phases.
Interobserver Agreement
A second observer recorded the steps completed correctly during starting block execution
on a minimum of 43% of sessions to assess interobserver agreement (IOA). Agreement was
calculated by dividing the number of steps of agreement between the two observers by the total
number of steps. Each research assistant was trained to collect data using one or both of the
expert video models used in the study and the written task analysis. I walked the research
assistant through an example of each step in the task analysis providing a visual example, using
an expert model video and novel runner, and verbally assisted on what each step should look like
to score the step as “yes” or “no” on the data sheet. First in screenshot form, allowing the
assistant to view a correct response and an incorrect response of each step, followed by a
demonstration of the functions in the Dartfish® application. Next, the research assistant
7
practiced scoring each step in the task analysis while viewing various block execution videos in
slow motion. Once scoring was completed I reviewed it and provided corrective feedback and
specific praise. Each research assistant scored the task analysis at 100% correct at the end of
training. If scoring fell below 80% during the study, a booster training would be provided, but it
was not needed.
For Alex, IOA data collected for 45% of sessions averaged 94% agreement (range: 88%96%). For Lindsey, IOA data collected for 43% of sessions averaged 94% agreement (range:
90%-98%). IOA data collected for Lauren in 43% of sessions averaged 91% agreement (range:
81%-100) and for Alison IOA data collected in 43% of sessions averaged 93% agreement (range:
83%-100%).
Social Validity
Social validity of the intervention was measured using a questionnaire with ratings on a
5-point Likert-type scale. Two different questionnaires were administered, one to the head coach
(see appendix B) and another to the participants (see appendix C) following completion of the
final phase. The questionnaires assessed the acceptability of the intervention procedures, ease of
implementation, how helpful they thought it was, and if they would recommend it to others.
Treatment Integrity
Treatment integrity (TI) data were collected by a research assistant on an average of 51%
(range: 18%-71%) of all sessions across participants to ensure procedures were carried out as
stated (see appendix D). Total number of steps varied depending on whether a participant was in
baseline or intervention phase at that time. The treatment integrity form included six steps in
baseline and follow-up and 24 steps in intervention. The research assistant was trained on the
8
experimental procedures for baseline and intervention prior to examination. Training was held in
person using a video recording of a novel subject as the runner, and the treatment integrity
checklist. Training involved reviewing each correct procedure used in baseline and intervention.
Exact agreement was calculated by dividing the number of agreements by the number of steps in
the task analysis then multiplying that total by 100 to get a percentage of agreement. Data
revealed 99.75% agreement across all participants. The mean TI data were 100% for Alex, 100%
for Lindsey, 96.5% for Lauren (range: 93%-100%), and 100% for Alison.
Experimental Design
A multiple baseline across participant’s design was employed, with baseline intervention,
and follow-up phases showing the percentage of correct steps completed in each assessment for
each participant. Intervention phases were staggered across participants.
Procedures
I met with the head coaches before data collection commenced to view and validate the
expert model video, review the items on the task analysis, review procedures used during all
phases, discuss potential participants, and provide a brief overview of procedures. I then met
with all potential participants to conduct an assessment of their qualification for the study. I
explained the recording procedure and allowed for time to discuss any concerns and/or answer
any questions. I asked those whom met the requirements and were interested in participating to
review and sign an assent form and asked for their legal guardians to review and sign a consent
form. Copies of each of the forms were provided for each participant’s legal guardians. Once all
consent forms were signed and returned data collection commenced.
9
Baseline. Sessions were held on the practice track at the team’s usual practice time.
Typical practices involves instructions, practice, and occasional feedback implemented in a
somewhat unsystematic fashion. The head coach of the team informed me of the predetermined
settings of the block pedals for each participant and communicated any changes in settings
before each training session began. When arriving at the track, equipment was set up to simulate
a typical practice session of block start practice. In other words, the participant retrieved starting
blocks and placed them in a lane on the track then positioned block pedals. Participants were
required to stretch with the team or individually before sessions commenced. All recording
equipment was prepared in advance for recordings. A verbal cue was given to signal the
participant to get into the starting blocks. Three trials were conducted consisting of the
participant getting into starting blocks and sprinting for 20 to 30 m. No feedback was provided to
the participant in baseline.
Video modeling and video feedback. The video modeling by experts with video
feedback condition involved showing the participant a video of an expert modeling the skill in
regular speed and again in slow motion. Video feedback included video recording a block start,
displaying the video, and providing verbal feedback. To begin, the participant was asked to
perform the skill while being recorded on the Dartfish® software application. Immediately
following the block start, the participant was provided with video feedback of her performance
on the iPad first in regular speed and then again in slow motion. During the feedback, I provided
descriptive praise for steps completed correctly using statements such as, “You did a nice job
keeping your head down” or “I really liked the way you remembered to keep your back foot
pressed firmly on the block pedal.” Corrective feedback describing behaviors to be improved
10
was provided using statements such as, “let’s remember to keep your back foot pressure firmly
against the pedal until take off” or “remember to keep your head down while sitting in the
blocks.” The participant’s performance video was then displayed in split screen mode with the
participant’s video on the left side or top of screen and expert model video displayed on the right
or bottom, both in slow motion. Following the side-by-side viewing the participant was asked to
perform the skill again while being recorded. These procedures were carried out until three
attempts were completed with video modeling and video feedback. Video recordings of each
assessment attempt began by zooming in on the displayed numbers on the starting block spine to
ensure participant correctly placed block pedals. Once the training session was completed the
participant was asked to execute the start three times without feedback to assess training. During
the first attempt at assessment participants were required to reset the blocks into the same lane
used in training and to place the block pedals in predetermined slots. The block pedals were not
moved between assessments.
Follow up. Follow up data were collected 2 weeks after the conclusion of intervention.
Procedures for follow up were conducted as in baseline, assessing three block start attempts with
no feedback provided.
11
Chapter 3:
Results
All participants demonstrated an increase in correct block start form after the introduction of an
expert model and video feedback (see figure 1). Baseline levels were variable for all participants.
At the onset of expert modeling and video feedback all participants’ scores rose well above their
scores in baseline. Each participant demonstrated slightly variable data throughout intervention
but no participant ever dropped below baseline levels. Baseline and intervention means were
50% (range 33%-72%) and 88% (range 77%-94%) for Alex, 56.5% (range 38%-66%) and 92.5%
(range 83%-100%) for Lindsey, 46% (range 22%-61%) and 92.5% (range 83%-100%) for
Lauren, and 63% (range 38%-77%) and 91.5% (range 83%-100%) for Alison. Three participants
Lindsey, Lauren, and Alison achieved 100% a number of times during the intervention phase.
After a 2-week period, follow-up data revealed maintenance of the gains with a mean of 96%
(range 94%-100%) for Alex, 90% (range 88%-94%) for Lindsey, 92% (range 88%-94%) for
Lauren, and 94% (range 88%-100%) for Alison.
Arrows in baseline and intervention phases indicate when the participants received block
start training (practice and feedback) during their regular track practice (see Figure 1). Alex
received such training in one practice session only during intervention. Lauren received block
start training in one practice session of baseline and Alison received it in two sessions of
12
baseline. Lindsey received block start training in one practice session during baseline and one
during intervention. Based on the timing of such training and visual inspection of the data, it
appears that block start training during regular practice sessions did not influence the data. On
the other hand, the intervention produced an immediate increase in the percentage correct.
Social validity. Social validity results demonstrate an overall strong liking of the
program across all four participant and head coach. Table 1 illustrates the results for each
question asked to each participant. Table 2 illustrates the results for each question asked to the
head coach. When participants were asked what they liked and did not like about the program
their general response was that they enjoyed how the program breaks down all the steps in the
block start making the skill easier to learn than ever. Responses also indicated an overall
delectation with the feedback provided and the style in which it was delivered. No participant
indicated a disliking to the program. The head coach’s overall feedback on the program was a
strong liking as well. When asked what he liked and did not like about the program he noted that
it gave a more intimate one on one training with the runners allowing them more time to grasp
the technical skill and benefit them in the future.
13
Figure 1. The percentage of correct steps completed during baseline, intervention, and follow-up
for four participants.
14
Table 1
Social Validity Results-participants
Alex
Lindsey
Lauren
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
4
4
4
5
5
4
1. I enjoyed participating in the training
Alison
program
2. I think the training program was helpful
3. The training program did not take too
much time from regular practice
4. I would recommend this program to
others
Note: Likert scale of 1 to 5. A score of 1 represents strongly disagree and 5 represents strongly
agree.
Table 2
Social Validity Results-head coach
1. The procedures were helpful for improving block start
4
2. I would recommend this procedure to others
5
3. The procedures were easy to use
5
4. The program did not disrupt normal practice
5
Note: Likert scale of 1 to 5. A score of 1 represents strongly disagree and 5 represents strongly
agree.
15
Chapter 4:
Discussion
Adding to the literature on effective feedback methods in sports performance (Benitez
Santiago & Miltenberger, 2016; Boyer et al., 2009; Downs et al., 2015; Kelley & Miltenberger,
2016; Van Wieringen et al., 1989) this study showed that expert modeling and video feedback
improved athletic skill performance. All four participants substantially improved on block start
form during intervention compared to baseline levels.
The results of this study exceeded those found in Boyer et al. (2009) that examined the
use of expert modeling and video feedback to improve the performance of three gymnastic skills.
Like Boyer et al. this study examined a packaged feedback method with a youth population on a
complex sport performance skill, however this study found higher levels of performance during
intervention and follow up. This study expands on the research that shows that providing an
athlete with an expert model and video feedback immediately following a trial performance will
increase correct execution of that skill (e.g., Boyer et al., 2009; Rikli & Smith, 1980).
It should be noted that half way through the study all but one participant, Alex, started
wearing their running spikes instead of tennis shoes during each session. Exact data points for
each participant’s first time wearing the spikes during the study are as followed; Lindsey on the
16th data point, Lauren the 22nd, and Alison the 10th. A change in shoe wear is noted because it
may have had an effect on the participants’ ability to perform specific steps, such as “majority of
front foot pressed firmly against pedal” in the bunched position correctly at consistent rates.
16
Inspection of the data in Figure 1 does not indicate any change in the data at the point that the
participants started wearing spikes.
Adding the expert model to the video feedback seemed to add value and was worth the
extra time it took to combine it with video feedback. Without having the expert model it would
have made providing detailed feedback on particular steps in the task analysis more difficult. For
example, as the video model showed how the runner’s shoulders should be leaning forward
during the set position and how the front foot should be pressed firmly against the block peddle
in the bunch position to the runners.
Although this study revealed marked improvements of participant performance, it did not
come without limitations. The 18-step task analysis used in this study only covered the basic
steps and angles required to correctly preform a block start. A block start should be performed in
one fluid motion requiring the sprinter to have agile flexibility and strength (Cowburn, 2005;
Lee, 2007, 2014; Rosenbaum, n.d.; Thomas, n.d.). A range was set for the angle positions instead
of one specific angle during the set and drive phase. This range was set when considering the
immaturity of the participants’ physical strength. Setting a range gave the sprinter an increased
opportunity of contacting the reinforcing property of performing that step correctly. Although the
task analysis used during this study may not be sensitive enough to measure improvement in an
elite sprinter’s block starts, it is sufficient for use with amateur runners.
While scoring the participants assessment videos it was discovered that steps such as
“hands positioned evenly apart at shoulder-width or slightly wider than shoulder-wide” and
“head and neck are in line with spine measuring from the top of the head to the lower back” were
difficult to clearly see through viewing the recordings. This was due to only having one camera
17
displaying one side of the runner during the filming of the performance. This lack of multiple
camera angles could have hindered the scoring results of a second observer not present during
assessments.
Unforeseen extraneous variables such as inconsistent attendance, frequent insect
swarming, and a distractible environment made it difficult to collect data throughout the study.
On one occasion insect swarms prevented data collection. The bug filled environment was
resolved with the use of bug spray in subsequent sessions while the attendance issue and
distractible environment was difficult to control. Due to attendance inconsistencies and time
sensitivity of the study one participant started baseline but never advanced to intervention and
thus was dropped.
After about five to 10 sessions in intervention phase participants started telling me what
steps they thought they might have gotten wrong before any feedback was provided and the
majority of the time the participant was right. This is a potentially important finding because it
suggests that the athletes acquired the ability to assess their own performance in real time even
before viewing the video. This increased awareness of performance in real time could be one
mechanism that accounts for the effectiveness of the intervention.
In addition to the clear increase in performance shown in the data, after the first track and
field meet participant’s parents and the team coaches reported that they saw improvement in the
participants’ block starts during the meets. These anecdotal reports, coupled with the social
validity data, suggest that the changes were socially significant.
In summary this study is the first to evaluate an expert model and video feedback to
improve block start formation with a young population. The results showed clear effects from
18
baseline to intervention phases confirming that the intervention increased the percentage of
correct steps executed consistently during a block start, more so than the unsystematic training
used by typical track and field coaches.
Future research could develop a measurement system that is more sensitive to the elite
sprinter. In considering creating a more sensitive measurement system, it would be valuable to
add a step to the “set position” to measure whether the runner is looking down the lane at the
finish line. This additional step could have positive effects on sprinter’s body angles during the
first couple of steps out of the blocks potentially aiding in the execution of advised angle position
consistently. Research should consider providing multiple camera angles to provide a more
accurate assessment of steps used to evaluate the athlete’s performance and a better view for the
participant to see during video feedback. Future replication should consider evaluating block
start performance in a dyad format. For example, training one athlete on the correct steps and
having that person teach another team member. Using a dyad assessment and intervention could
cut down on the amount of time spent providing feedback on block starts with each sprinter. In
addition, the friendly competition on who could improve the most and the fastest might function
as an establishing operation for improved performance. Adding peer mentoring and/or pyramidal
training with an advanced sprinter and having that person work one on one with other younger or
less experienced runners would also cut down on the amount of time the coaches have to spend
providing feedback. Future research could also consider conducting assessment probes during
track meets to evaluate whether the sprinter would maintain correct block start formation in
completive environments along with having secondary effects of improving race times. Finally
19
research should evaluate whether the improved performance resulted in improved times during
the sprint.
20
References
400 Athlete. (2015, November 2). Slow Motion Sprint (Asafa Powell, Usain Bolt). [Video
file].Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eai1DZVqIRM
Allison, M. G., & Ayllon, T. (1980). Behavioral coaching in the development of skills in
football, gymnastics, and tennis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 297-314.
DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1980.13-297
Amneus, J., Babbit, D., Baker, B., Buchicchio, M., Coleman, E. R. D., Derse, E.,… Harkness, H.
(2012). Acceleration. LA84 Foundation Track and Field Coaching Manual (chapter 10).
Retrieved from http://library.la84.org/3ce/CoachingManuals/LA84trackfield.pdf
Angelescu, E., & Reske, F. (2006). [PDF] Improving Sports Performance with Wearable
Computing. Retrieved from
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=improving+sports+performance+with+wearable
+computing
Baudry, L., Leroy, D., & Chollet, D. (2006). The effect of combined self-and expert-modelling
on the performance of the double leg circle on the pommel horse. Journal of Sports
Sciences, 24, 1055-1063. DOI: 10.1080/02640410500432243
Benitez Santiago, A., & Miltenberger, R. G. (2016). Using video feedback to improve martial
arts performance. Behavioral Interventions. DOI: 10.1002/bin.1424
21
Boyer, E., Miltenberger, R. G., Batsche, C., & Fogel, V. (2009). Video modeling by experts with
video feedback to enhance gymnastics skills. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42,
855-860. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2009.42-855
Brobst, B., & Ward, P. (2002). Effects of public posting, goal setting, and oral feedback on the
skills of female soccer players. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 247-257. DOI:
10.1901/jaba.2002.35-247
Cowburn, S. (2005). Crouched start using blocks (as in 100m) (Ed 6)., Coaching sprint starts, pp.
5-10. Retrieved from
http://www.walittleathletics.com.au/Portals/49/Coaching/StartssetupLAVic.pdf
Downs, H. E., Miltenberger, R., Biedronski, J., & Witherspoon, L. (2016). The effects of video
self-evaluation on skill acquisition with yoga postures. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis.
Dowrick, P. W., & Dove, C. (1980). The use of self-modeling to improve the swimming
performance of spina bifida children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 51-56.
DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1980.13-51
Fitterling, J. M., & Ayllon, T. (1983). Behavioral coaching in classical ballet enhancing skill
development. Behavior Modification, 7, 345-368. DOI: 10.1177/01454455830073004
Guadagnoli, M., Holcomb, W., & Davis, M. (2002). The efficacy of video feedback for learning
the golf swing. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20, 615-622. DOI:
10.1080/026404102320183176
22
Gutiérrez-Dávila, M., Dapena, J., & Campos, J. (2006). The effect of muscular pre-tensing on
the sprint start. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 22, 194-201. DOI: 10.1249/00005768200605001-00184
Haugen, T. A., Tønnessen, E., & Seiler, S. K. (2012). The difference is in the start: Impact of
timing and start procedure on sprint running performance. The Journal of Strength &
Conditioning Research, 26, 473-479. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318226030b
Hazen, A., Johnstone, C., Martin, G.L., & Srikameswaran, S. (1990). A videotaping feedback
package for improving skills of youth competitive swimmers. The Sport Psychologist, 4,
213-227.
How to use starting blocks. (n.d.). Using starting blocks in a race. Retrieved from
http://track.isport.com/track-guides/how-to-use-starting-blocks
Hume, K. M., & Grossman, J. (1992). Musical reinforcement of practice behaviors among
competitive swimmers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 665-670. DOI:
10.1901/jaba.1992.25-665
Kelley, H., & Miltenberger, R. G. (2016). Using video feedback to improve horseback riding
skills. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 49, 138-147. DOI: 10.1002/jaba.272
Kladopoulos, C. N., & McComas, J. J. (2001). The effects of form training on foul-shooting
performance in members of a women's college basketball team. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 34, 329-332. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2001.34-329
Laguna, P. L. (1999). Effects of multiple correct model demonstrations on cognitive
representation development and performance accuracy in motor skill acquisition. Journal
of Human Movement Studies, 37, 55-86.
23
Lee, J. (2007, July 18). Sprint start. Retrieved from
http://speedendurance.com/2007/07/18/valeri-borzov-a-clinic-on-sprinting-from-startingblocks-first-3-steps/
Lee, J. (2014, January 13). What is the drive phase in sprinting? Part 2. Retrieved from
http://speedendurance.com/2014/01/03/what-is-the-drive-phase-in-sprinting-part-2/
Luiselli, J.K., Woods, K.E., & Reed, D.D. (2011). Review of sports performance research with
youth, collegiate, and elite athletes. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44, 999-1002.
DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2011.44-999
Mackenzie, B. (2001). Sprint Starting Block Settings [WWW] Available from:
http://www.brianmac.co.uk/sprints/blockset.htm [Accessed 29/3/2016]
Magill, R. A. (1993). Modeling and verbal feedback influences on skill learning. International
Journal of Sport Psychology. 24, 358-369.
Maryam, C., Yaghoob, M., Darush, N., & Mojtaba, I. (2009). The comparison of effect of videomodeling and verbal instruction on the performance in throwing the discus and hammer.
Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 2782-2785. DOI:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.493
McCullagh, P., SooHoo, S., & Takemoto, K.Y. (2004). A comparison of modeling and imagery
on the performance of a motor skill. Journal of Sport Behavior, 27, 349-370.
Ming, S., & Martin, G. L. (1996). Single-subject evaluation of a self-talk package for improving
figure skating performance. Sport Psychologist, 10, 227-238.
24
Osborne, K., Rudrud, E., & Zezoney, F. (1990). Improved curveball hitting through the
enhancement of visual cues. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 371-377. DOI:
10.1901/jaba.1990.23-371
Quinn, M. J., Miltenberger, R. G., & Fogel, V. A. (2015). Using tagteach to improve the
proficiency of dance movements. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48, 11-24. DOI:
10.1002/jaba.191
Reed, D. D., Critchfield, T. S., & Martens, B. K. (2006). The generalized matching law in elite
sport competition: Football play calling as operant choice. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 39, 281. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2006.146-05
Rikli, R., & Smith, G. (1980). Videotape feedback effects on tennis serving form. Perceptual
and Motor Skills, 50, 895-901. DOI: 10.2466/pms.1980.50.3.895
Rogerson, L. J., & Hrycaiko, D. W. (2002). Enhancing competitive performance of ice hockey
goaltenders using centering and self-talk. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 1426. DOI: 10.1080/10413200209339008
Romanowich, P., Bourret, J., & Vollmer, T. R. (2007). Further analysis of the matching law to
describe two-and three-point shot allocation by professional basketball players. Journal
of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 311-315. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2007.119-05
Rosenbaum, M. (n.d.). Starting Block Technique: Position Yourself for Sprinting Success.
Retrieved from http://trackandfield.about.com/od/sprintsandrelays/p/startfichter.htm
Rothstein, A. L. (1980). Effective use of videotape replay in learning motor skills. Journal of
Physical Education and Recreation, 51, 59-60. DOI: 10.1080/00971170.1980.10624095
25
Shapiro, E. S., & Shapiro, S. (1985). Behavioral coaching in the development of skills in track.
Behavior Modification, 9, 211-224. DOI: 10.1177/01454455850092005
Smith, S. L., & Ward, P. (2006). Behavioral interventions to improve performance in collegiate
football. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 385-391. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2006.506
SooHoo, S., Takemoto, K. Y., & McCullagh, P. (2004). A comparison of modeling and imagery
on the performance of a motor skill. Journal of Sport Behavior, 27, 349-370.
Stokes, J. V., & Luiselli, J. K. (2010). Functional analysis and behavioral coaching intervention
to improve tackling skills of a high school football athlete. Journal of Clinical Sport
Psychology, 4, 150-157.
Team USA. (2014, July 15). Sanya Richards-Ross: Behind the Scenes Episode 2. [Video file].
Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBRWKHQCF-o
Thomas, L. (n.d.). Starting blocks. Retrieved from
http://www.athletesacceleration.com/startingblocks.html
Van Wieringen, P.C.W., Emmen, H.H., Bootsma, R.J., Hoogesteger, M., & Whiting, H. T. A.
(1989). The effects of video-feedback on the learning of tennis service by intermediate
players. Journal of Sports Sciences, 7, 153-162. DOI: 10.1080/02640418908729833
Ward, P., & Carnes, M. (2002). Effects of posting self‐set goals on collegiate football
players'skill execution during practice and games. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
35, 1-12. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2002.35-1
26
Watson, M. D. (1987). Incidence of injuries in high school track and field athletes and its relation
to performance ability. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 15, 251-254. DOI:
10.1177/036354658701500310
Zetou, E., Fragouli, M., & Tzetzis, G. (1999). The influence of star and self-modeling on
volleyball skill acquisition. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 37, 127-143.
27
Appendices
Appendix A: Task Analysis for Sprint Block Formation
Sprint Block Formations
YES
NO
Bunched into blocks
Blocks are positioned in the centered lane
Block pedals are correct distance from the starting line (approximately 1 to
1.5 ft. from starting line)
Foot block at correct angles (define individually)
Feet correctly located in blocks (majority of the foot in front pedal is pressed
back against block pedal) and vertically positioned on the pedal (i.e. heal does
not fall to the side)
Fingers behind the line form a high bridge (thumb and forefingers are the
only part of hands touching track with palm of hands off the ground) and are
just behind or touching the starting (i.e. the white line)
Hands positioned evenly apart at shoulder-width or slightly wider than
shoulder-width
Shoulders are back and in line or slightly forward of the hands
Arms are straight but the elbows are not in a locked position
Head and neck in line with spine (i.e. head is not leaning to one side or
another) neck should appear to be in a relaxed position
Set Position
Raise hips slowly to a position above the shoulders
Head and neck are in line with the spine measuring from top of head to lower
back
Shoulders are vertical or slightly forward of hands
Front leg: knee (power leg) measuring from hips to heel; center of angle at the
middle-back of knee at a 90-99 degree angle
Rear leg: knee (lead leg) measuring from hips to heel; center of angle at the
middle-back of knee at a 110-130 degree angle
Feet (both front & rear foot) are pressed against the block pedal
Drive phase (First step out of the blocks)
28
In a wide range of motion forcefully drive arms in opposite directions (one
moving forwards and the other moving backwards).
The arm that is on the same side as the leg closest to the starting line moves
forward first.
From the top of head down to toes of back foot measure 45-90 degree angle
29
Appendix B: Social Validity Questionnaire- Coach
The procedures were helpful for improving the block starts
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neutral
1
2
3
Agree
4
Strongly agree
5
I would recommend this procedure to others
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neutral
1
2
3
Agree
4
Strongly agree
5
The procedures were easy to use
Strongly disagree
Disagree
1
2
Neutral
3
Agree
4
Strongly agree
5
The procedures did not disrupt normal practice
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neutral
1
2
3
Agree
4
Strongly agree
5
What did you like and not like about the procedure?
30
Appendix C: Social Validity Questionnaire- Athlete
I enjoyed participating in the training program
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neutral
1
2
3
Agree
4
Strongly agree
5
I think the training program was helpful
Strongly disagree
Disagree
1
2
Agree
4
Strongly agree
5
The training program did not take too much time from regular practice
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
1
2
3
4
Strongly agree
5
I would recommend this program to others
Strongly disagree
Disagree
1
2
Strongly agree
5
Neutral
3
Neutral
3
What did you like and not like about the program?
31
Agree
4
Appendix D: Treatment Integrity Form
Baseline
YES
Three trials were ran with each participant
No feedback was provided throughout session
Video modeling and video feedback Training Trials
Had the participant view expert model video regular speed
Had the participant view expert model video in slow motion
The participant was asked to preform a block start
Recording was made of participant’s performance using the Ipad®
The participant was shown the video of performance on Dartfish®
application in regular speed
The participant was shown the video of performance on Dartfish®
application in slow motion
The participant was provided with descriptive praise on last
performance
The participant was provided with corrective feedback on
performance (if needed)
The participant was shown her performance video side-by-side the
expert model video in slow motion using the Dartfish® application
During the side-by-side viewing the participant received feedback
on performance
Training assessments
The participant was asked to preform block start three times
consecutively
The participant did not receive feedback on performances
32
NO
Appendix E: USF IRB Approval Letter
33
34