The Mental Game

4DIAGNOSTICS OF COGNITIONS

In literature nowadays, an almost unmanageable flood of cognitive tests exists. They range from scientifically proven to pure software products that do not meet scientific criteria. In the following, no general overview is given. However, selected methods which were developed in the last years at the Institute for Training Science and Sports Informatics and were used in studies and the practice are presented. Four laboratory tests and four field tests are also presented as examples.

Laboratory Tests

In the following, four cognitive test procedures are presented. After the testing, the athletes received a summary of their test results compared to different sport-specific test subject groups (see figure 10).

Attention Window Test

The attention window test (AWT) by Hüttermann, Memmert, Simons, and Bock (2013) can be used to assess the individual's range of attention. During each test phase, players are instructed to fix a central point and try to detect a gray triangle within circle and square distractors. For several attempts, the target will appear at different distances from the attachment point (10, 20, and 30 degrees), along with one of eight equally disputed radial lines from a square in the center of the display (45-degree distance) (see figure 11). This random display is shown for 12 ms, followed by a colored mask (100 ms). After the masking, the players are asked to indicate how many gray triangles they had just seen in the different locations, depending on the orientation of the objects. The participants must complete 180 attempts. This task measures how well people can handle objects far from fixation (Hüttermann, Simons, & Memmert, 2014). The dependent measure is the point distribution of the diagonal attention window and the division of the total value by the number of dimensions (i.e., three).

Working Memory Span Test

The established working memory span test of Conway, Kane, Bunting, Hambrick, Wilhelm, and Engle (2005) measures the athlete's ability to draw attention to the task without being distracted by other thoughts. The processing task is to count certain forms between the distractors and then remember the counts for later memory recall. Each task contains randomly arranged dark blue circles, green circles, and dark blue squares (see figure 12). The task is to count out loud the dark blue circles, and then announce the total number of circles at the end. After two to six tasks, a reminder mask appears in which the players have to fill in their memorized totals precisely in the order in which they were displayed (see Kane, Hambrick, Tuholski, Wilhelm, Payne, & Engle 2004, for a detailed description). The simplicity of this counting task permits it to be performed with almost any player. The margin score is a subtotal (see Conway et al. 2005) that represents the sum of all successfully recovered items-where a correctly retrieved item from a set of two items gets 2 points, and a correctly retrieved item from a set of six items gets 6 points-divided by the maximum possible score. The test consists of 15 attempts. The dependent measure is the evaluation of the correctly memorized objects in percent.

Perceptual Load Test

The perceptual load test by Beck and Lavie (2005) is a measure of cognitive inhibition since it determines the extent to which players are distracted by stimuli that are entirely irrelevant to their task. The players perform the soccer-specific perceptual load task (Furley, Memmert, & Schmid, 2013) which starts with two example blocks (a high and a low cognitive distraction load); they are followed by eight experimental blocks that alternate between low and high load blocks (figure 13). All players start with one block under high load. Before each measurement, a fixation cross of 1,000 ms is displayed in the middle of the screen, followed by the task display with the soccer-specific arrangement and the distraction maneuver. The task indicators are displayed for 100 ms. Players are instructed to ignore the distraction and indicate as quickly and accurately as possible which player is in possession of the ball. The distraction maneuver is always shown at a fixing point (Beck & Lavie, 2005). The participants react to the target stimuli by pressing a key. A new task is triggered by the player's reaction or omissions within two seconds. After each attempt, feedback on the quality of the answers or omissions is given by means of a computer sound. After each block, the participants are reminded of the critical assignment. The test consists of 160 attempts. The dependent measure is the reaction time of the perceptual stress related to the state of low and high distraction.

Multiple Object Tracking Test

The multiple object tracking test for movement tracking measures the velocity at which players are still able to track multiple relevant moving objects (Alvarez & Franconeri, 2005). 3D multiple object tracking training has positive effects on passing decisions (Romeas, Guldner, & Faubert, 2016), but no significant transfer effects on other visual or executive functions (Scharfen & Memmert, 2021).

The players observe the positions of a series of moving circles on a computer monitor. The display initially contains four green and three blue circles. After three seconds in sleep mode, the blue items turn green and are identical to the targets (green circles), and all circles begin to move as players try to track the positions of the initial green items. The test is adaptable so that the speed thresholds and the number of attempts depend on the abilities of the players. After eight seconds, the circles stop and players must mark the three formerly blue circles. Performance is defined by the number of correctly tracked and marked circles. This task shows individual differences in the ability to divide and maintain attention on several independently moving objects (see figures 14a, 14b, and 14c), but no significant transfer effects on other visual or executive functions.

Field Test

Elementary cognitions are also known as basic tactics in sports games (Memmert, 2004a). Game test situations can make both tactical creativity (Memmert, 2010a, b; Memmert & Roth, 2007) and game intelligence (best solutions) assessable for basic tactical tasks (cf. Memmert, 2010b; Memmert & Roth, 2003; Memmert, 2013). As already described in the chapter on game intelligence, these are basic competencies that are of particular importance in many sports games and form the foundation for later sport-specific (here handball) tactics.

Game test situations can assess both tactical creativity (Memmert, 2010a, b; Memmert & Roth, 2007) and game intelligence (best solutions) in basic tactical tasks (cf. Memmert, 2010b; Memmert & Roth, 2003; Memmert, 2013). The resulting convergent performance indicators can be used for talent diagnostics in clubs or for grading in physical education classes. In the club, it may be useful to use a video camera to record children's behavior and then use a video and scale to assess tactical behavior. At school, the teacher can also use the developed scale to make the assessment directly. As an example, four standardized game test situations with their scales for the evaluation of convergent tactical performance are presented below. They were comprehensively tested with regard to quality criteria of quantitative research (Memmert, 2004a, b). These diagnostic options use the basic module labels from Memmert (2004a). As these are almost identical in content to the basic modules of Roth and Kröger (2011), they are also listed. Game test situations with the scales for evaluating divergent tactical performances can be read in Memmert (2010a, b) as well as in Memmert and Roth (2007).

Game Test Situation: Moving the Ball to the Goal

In this basic tactic (creating a majority), the players should play the ball in the direction of the goal area. For this purpose, it must be assessed whether the player currently in possession of the ball-if it makes sense-has played the ball in a particular direction of the goal area, and if the most considerable possible...