Expertise and Deceptive Movements in Sport.

BACKGROUND: Deceptive movements occur when an actor seeks to fake, hide or delay kinematic information about their true movement outcomes. The purpose of deceptive movements is to impair the perception of opponents (the 'observer') to gain an advantage over them. We argue though that a lack of conceptual clarity has led to confusion about what deception is and in understanding the different approaches by which an actor can deceive their opponent. The aim of this article is to outline a conceptual framework for understanding deceptive movements in sport. MAIN BODY: Adopting Interpersonal Deception Theory from the field of communication, we define deception as when an actor deliberately alters their actions in an attempt to impair the ability of an observer to anticipate their true action outcomes. Further, deception can be achieved either by what we define as deceit, the act of providing false information, or disguise, the act of concealing the action outcome. Skilled athletes often have actions that are difficult to anticipate, but an action is only classified as containing deception if the actor has explicit intent to deceive an observer. Having outlined the conceptual framework, we then review existing empirical findings on the skilled perception of deceptive movements considering the framework. This approach includes a critical evaluation of the mechanisms known to facilitate the perceptual ability to prevent being deceived, including a consideration of visual search strategies, confidence, the contribution of visual and motor experiences, and the influence of response biases and action capabilities on perceptual performance. CONCLUSION: The distinction between deceit and disguise particularly helps to show that most research has examined deceit, with little known about how an actor can more effectively disguise their action, or about how an observer can improve their ability to anticipate the outcome of disguised actions. The insights help to identify fruitful areas for future research and outline implications for skill acquisition and performance enhancement.

Skilled deceivers are better action perceivers and vice versa.

Skilled actors rely on deception to disrupt the perceptual ability of opponents who seek to anticipate action intentions. Common-coding theory (Prinz, 1997) purports that action and perception share common origins in the brain, and therefore it seems plausible that the ability to 'see through' a deceptive action would be associated with a capacity to perform the same action. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the ability to perform a deceptive action would be related to the ability to perceive the same type of action. Fourteen skilled rugby players performed deceptive (side-step) and non-deceptive actions while running towards a camera. The deceptiveness of those participants was determined by testing the ability of a separate group of eight equally skilled observers to anticipate the impeding running directions using a temporally occluded video-based test. Based on the overall response accuracies, participants were separated into high- and low-deceptiveness groups. These two groups then themselves took part in a video-based test. Results revealed that the skilled deceivers had a significant advantage in their ability to better anticipate the action outcomes of highly deceptive actions. The skilled deceivers' sensitivity to discriminate deceptive from non-deceptive actions was significantly better than that of less-skilled deceivers when viewing the most-deceptive actor. Moreover, the skilled perceivers performed actions that appeared to be better disguised than those of the less-skilled perceivers. These findings suggest that, consistent with common-coding theory, the perception of deceptive and non-deceptive actions is associated with the capability to produce deceptive actions and vice versa.