<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

# The role of visuospatial abilities in memorizing animations among soccer players

Hatem Ben Mahfoudh, Bachir Zoudji

► To cite this version:

Hatem Ben Mahfoudh, Bachir Zoudji. The role of visuospatial abilities in memorizing animations among soccer players. Journal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical Activity, 2020, 15 (1), 10.1515/jirspa-2020-0002. hal-04472161

HAL Id: hal-04472161

https://hal.science/hal-04472161v1

Submitted on 21 Oct 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

Hatem Ben Mahfoudh* and Bachir Zoudji

# The role of visuospatial abilities in memorizing animations among soccer players

https://doi.org/10.1515/jirspa-2020-0002

Received January 14, 2020; accepted November 3, 2020;

published online November 13, 2020

## Abstract

**Objectives:** The use of dynamic media such as animations for educational purposes in the sport field keeps growing. However, not adapting these information-enriched supports to learners' prerequisites can diminish their learning efficiency. In this paper, we studied the effect of visuospatial abilities (VSA) on the memorization of a dynamic tactical scene among soccer players.

**Methods:** Participants (N=48) performed a multitask VSA test (control test) to distinguish people with “high” and “low” VSA. Then, they were required to memorize and reproduce a dynamic sequence (main test).

**Results:** Results indicate a learning enhancer effect of VSA. Players with high VSA were more efficient in memorizing the sequence than those with low VSA.

**Conclusion:** Results suggest considering VSA in order to optimize learning from dynamic presentations even if participants belong to the same group. In addition, VSA training for athletes is recommended in order to enhance their learning of dynamic visual content.

**Keywords:** animation; memorization; prior knowledge; soccer; visuospatial abilities.

Over the past three decades, sports researchers largely invested in computer sciences. Many systems were developed to improve coaching and/or athletes' performance. For example, animation, video and virtual reality (VR) trainings were conceived to improve athletes' technical

and/or tactical learning (Cha et al., 2015; Lopes et al., 2009; Schorer, Schapschröer, Fischer, Habben, & Baker, 2018; Tsai, 2018). In some cases, researchers used tactical animations as visuals aids to compensate for hearing issues among elite athletes (Kozina et al., 2016). Likewise, these tools were utilized to improve players' accuracy and anticipation skills to help them manage high-pressure situations in the real world better (Murgia et al., 2014; Stinson & Bowman, 2014). Dynamic presentations were also developed in order to enhance assistant referees' decision-making skills (Put, Wagemans, Spitz, Williams, & Helsen, 2016). This technological progress has favored the use of animations in sports. The advantage of dynamic presentations lies in the exposure of the different interactions and transitions of the scene's elements. That is the reason why trainers use dynamic media to explain different game strategies through time and space and to acquire in-depth knowledge.

Previous studies have shown that soccer players are more efficient at memorizing tactical schemes when information is dynamic (Khacharem, Zoudji, & Ripoll, 2013; Zoudji, Khacharem, & Porter, 2015). Indeed, athletes possess dynamic knowledge structures (Ripoll, Zoudji, & Llucia, 2009) that enable them to understand the different states of a dynamic sequence and to anticipate sequences close to the real game logic. Even though athletes develop specific knowledge during their experience, other learner characteristics such as VisuoSpatial Abilities (VSA) may differ from one another and influence the memorization process. VSA are a well-studied cognitive factor. Their importance in acquiring new knowledge from multimedia supports is well-documented in several areas such as anatomy (Berney, Bétrancourt, Molinari, & Hoyek, 2015), earth science (Black, 2005), technology, engineering and mathematics (Uttal, Miller, & Newcombe, 2013). However, its effect on the memorization of tactical scenes in team sports has not been studied yet and has often been overlooked.

The present study aimed at investigating the effect of VSA on the memorization of a dynamic tactical scene among soccer players. A major part of this aim was to verify whether the contribution of VSA in memorizing new information was as effective as their specific prior knowledge.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

<footnote>*Corresponding author: Hatem Ben Mahfoudh, Université Polytechnique Hauts-de-France, EA 2445-DeVisu-Laboratoire en Design Visuel et Urbain, F-59313, Valenciennes, France; and Université polytechnique des Hauts-de-France, Voirie Communale Université Val Mont Houy, 59300, Famars, France, Phone: 03 27 51 12 34, E-mail: benmahfoudhhatem@gmail.com

Bachir Zoudji, Université Polytechnique Hauts-de-France, EA 2445-DeVisu-Laboratoire en Design Visuel et Urbain, Valenciennes, France</footnote>
## Animation memorization process

For athletes, the main goal of memorizing a new tactical scene is to create a clear and structured mental model of the presented content. This process requires the integration of new external information based on Working Memory (WM) treatments and, then, the creation of links with their prior knowledge stored in Long-Term Memory (LTM) (the knowledge construction view of learning, Mayer, 2012).

Dynamic presentations, such as animations, have the educational advantage of explicitly displaying changes in action through time and space, which facilitates the creation of a precise mental model. However, this type of presentation can induce a high cognitive load caused by its transient nature. In other words, animations always display new information over time (transient information effect: Leahy & Sweller, 2011; Sweller, Ayres, & Kalyuga, 2011). In such situations, learners must both process current information and retain previous ones at the same time, which can cause interference between them and inhibit learning (Kacharem et al., 2013). Indeed, the memorization process is disturbed when the presentation requires high attentional demands and exceed the limited retention capacity of the WM (7 ± 2 information; Baddeley, 2001, 2002; Miller, 1956). According to the cognitive load theory (CLT: Choi, van Merriënboer, & Paas, 2014; Sweller, Ayres, & Kalyuga, 2011; Sweller, van Merriënboer, & Paas, 2019), the WM is exposed to two types of cognitive load while processing animations. On the one hand, the intrinsic cognitive load depends on the number of elements and their interactivities, and, on the other hand, the extrinsic cognitive load depends on the design of the presentation. Depending on learners' characteristics, the cognitive load intensity varies and affects the memorization process differently.

Indeed, for professional players, when information to memorize is related to their specific domain, a part of their LTM is activated as a WM (long-term working memory: Ericsson & Kintsch, 1995) in order to access their prior knowledge and recover all needed information. This process can reduce the cognitive load and enable better learning (Paas, Renkl, & Sweller, 2003). According to the Animation Processing Model theory (APM: Lowe & Boucheix, 2008, 2011, 2017) learning from animation goes through several cognitive stages ranging from animation decomposition into event units to composition and building of a mental model. Professionals can reach the final learning phases and create an adequate mental model based on their prior knowledge. Their top-down

attentional processes contribute to guiding their attention in searching and assimilating information based on their pre-existing patterns (Kriz & Hegarty, 2007). The skilled memory theory (Ericsson & Kintsch, 1995) sustains that experienced people select relevant indicators in the WM and easily access their specific knowledge in the LTM to recover needed information and respond to a particular situation. These high-level athletes' mechanisms represent a major advantage in memorizing and/or learning dynamic presentations. However, other features such as VSA may interfere and influence the memorization process.

## Visuospatial abilities

VSA are defined as the ability to recall, generate, represent and transform symbolic and non-linguistic information (Linn & Petersen, 1985; Toivainen et al., 2018; Yılmaz, 2017). According to Peck, Yuksel, Harrison, Ottley, and Chang (2012), VSA are a cognitive trait that varies among individuals and affects learning performance when using visualizations.

Currently, two divergent theories treat the interactions between VSA and learning from dynamic media. On the one hand, the ability-as-enhancer hypothesis (Brucker et al., 2014; Hegarty, 2005; Hegarty & Sims, 1994; Huk, 2006) states that individuals with high visuospatial abilities (HSA) are better equipped to handle dynamic visualizations (e.g. animation, video) because they possess more cognitive and attentional resources to support learning from these complex presentations (Çöltekin, Francelet, Richter, Thoresen, & Fabrikant, 2018). Previous studies such as Mayer and Sims (1994) have examined the effect of VSA on multimedia learning and found that VSA impact the understanding of dynamic phenomena. Specifically, HSA learned better from animations than people with low spatial abilities (LSA). Brucker, Scheiter, and Gerjets (2014) also examined the effect of VSA on learning biological movement from dynamic presentations. Results indicate a better recognition performance from realistic presentations of HSA over LSA. Furthermore, medical researchers (Berny, Bétrancourt, Molinari, & Hoyek, 2015; Garg, Norman, & Sperotable, 2001; Loftus, Jacobsen, & Wilson, 2018) revealed that VSA are crucial in learning human anatomy. On the other hand, the ability-as-compensator hypothesis (Hays, 1996; Höffler & Leutner, 2011) stipulates that dynamic visualizations act as a cognitive prosthesis for LSA (Hegarty & Kriz, 2008) since it provides them with an explicit external representation of
the system, which reduces their need for mental manipu-
lations. Two meta-analytical reviews of the literature
(Höffler, 2010; Kaushal & Panda, 2019) admit that anima-
tions enable LSA to be as efficient as HSA when learning
from dynamic presentations.

Even though the effect of VSA in processing dynamic
presentations is well-documented, to our knowledge, no
study has tested their effect on memorizing tactical game
patterns in team sports such as soccer yet. Indeed, the
main issue is that most coaches, trainers and/or teachers
conceive external visualizations in a “one-size-fits-all”
manner. However, not adapting external visualizations to
learners’ aptitudes may put some at a disadvantage.
Understanding individuals’ specific abilities is crucial to
provide educators with guidelines on how to adjust in-
teractions between learners and computerized visualiza-
tion systems. As far as we know, Souriac-Poirier, Thon,
and Cadopi (2008) wrote the only study examining the
effect of VSA on athlete’s memory in individual sports. It
aimed at testing the effect of VSA on the motor recall of
dance sequences. In this study, learners’ mental imagery
was assessed using the Movement Imagery Questionnaire
(Hall & Pongrac, 1983) and the mental rotation ability
using the S test (Thurstone & Thurstone, 1967). These
tests were followed by the memorization of a dynamic
sequence and its reproduction on the field. Results did
not show a significant effect of VSA on the memorization
of dynamic motor scenes. The lack of influence may be
due to the use of a unique objective task to measure VSA
instead of using multiple tasks that measure different
spatial dimensions (D’Oliveira, 2004).

The purpose of this study was to investigate the ef-
fect of VSA on the memorization of a tactical soccer
scene among soccer players. We hypothesized that
people with high spatial abilities would be more efficient
in memorizing the animation than those with low spatial
abilities.

Method

Participants

The experiment was conducted on 48 male soccer players aged be-
tween 18 and 39 (M\_age=24.85, SD=5.55) with 17.1 ± 4.7 years of practice
and 7.3 ± 1 h of practice per week. All participants answered a ques-
tionnaire concerning their soccer practice. According to Swann,
Moran, and Piggott (2015), the chosen participants were competitive
elite players, that is to say, they often compete at the highest level in
their sport (e.g. the best divisions or leagues), but do not prevail at this

level (e.g. winning events or medals). Subjects had no vision-
problems, otherwise, it was corrected with glasses or lenses. Also,
participants affirmed it was the first time they were doing this kind of
experience. Finally, they volunteered to participate and provided
informed consent. Approval for this project was granted by the local
ethics committee.

Materials

Two tests were computerized and displayed on a TOSHIBA L755-1GL
laptop with a 15.6-inch screen. The control test contained three tasks to
measure subjects' VSA. The main test consisted in memorizing a
tactical soccer scene and reproducing it on a sheet of paper.

**Control test:** Three tasks were programmed with the Unreal Engine 4 (software) of the American Epic Games studio written in C++. Each task was designed to measure a subfactor based on the taxonomy of Linn and Peterson (1985).

The first task, Water level task (Piaget & Inhelder, 1956), aimed at measuring subjects' spatial perception which is the ability to estimate spatial relationships according to the orientation of their bodies. This task consisted in identifying the horizontal line of water among four tilted glasses. Each individual had 3 min to respond to eight situations by clicking on the corresponding icon to the chosen glass. The angle of inclination differed for each situation to avoid repetition. The final score was rated on eight points.

The second task, Vandenberg and Kuse mental rotation task (Vandenberg & Kuse, 1978), aimed at measuring subjects' mental rotation ability which represents the ability to mentally rotate images and figures in two or three dimensions. During this task, an initial cubic figure (x) and four rotated propositions were presented. Subjects had to identify among four propositions the two figures that referred to the initial one. Each individual had 6 min to respond to a total of 20 situations by clicking on the corresponding icon to the chosen figure. One point was awarded for the choice of only one correct answer, two points for the choice of the two correct answers and none for the choice of a good and a wrong answer or two wrong answers. The final score was rated on 40 points.

The third task, Paper Folding task (Ekstrom, French, Harman, & Dermen, 1976), aimed at measuring subjects' spatial visualization which is the ability to deal with complex spatial forms involving multiple dynamic operations (e.g. combining spatial perception and mental rotation). During this task, participants were shown an initial figure (x), which was a drawing on a sheet of paper, and four propositions, which were suggestions of the initial figure after folding. Subjects had to identify the figures that referred to the initial one among the four propositions. Each individual had 6 min to click on the icon corresponding to their chosen figure for the 20 proposed situations. The final score was rated on 20 points.

**Main test:** The main test consisted in memorizing a dynamic soccer
scene created with the software “tacticalpad” developed by the
Temma Software company. The sequence showed a counter-attack
tactic drill made by five players. Nine actions, divided into player
movements and ball passes, were presented (see Figure 1).
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1:** Representative diagram of the dynamic scene to memorize.</figcaption></figure>

## Procedure

The experiment was carried out individually in a quiet place. The entire test lasted for about 40 min. Five to ten minutes were dedicated to answering the questionnaire and explaining tasks, 15 min to measuring VSA (control test) and 15 min to memorizing the scene (main test). Every participant was given instructions, explanations and eventually a familiarization trial before performing each task to make sure he understood what to do.

First, participants performed three VSA tasks (control test) and proceeded then to the main test (memorization test) which contained two phases. During the first phase, participants repeated the anima- tion as many times as they wanted in order to memorize it (study phase). Once they reported they memorized it, the broadcasting was stopped, the laptop was shut down and they started the reproduction phase (test phase). Participants performed two successive tasks. First, they evaluated the mental effort invested in the memorization with a 9-point subjective Likert rating scale, ranging from 1 (very low) to 9 (very high) mental effort. This self-report measure is widely accepted as a valid and noninvasive method of estimating cognitive load (e.g. Paas, 1992; Paas, Tuovinen, Tabbers, & Van Gerven, 2003; Pass & Van Merriënboer, 1993; Pass, Van Merriënboer, & Adam, 1994). Second, they reproduced the scene. They were given a sheet of paper with the same field and starting positions of players drawn on it. They had to draw discontinuous arrows to show movements and continuous ar- rows to show passes (memorizing items). Also, they were required to number the actions to check if they remembered the chronology of the scene (memorizing information serial order). A point was given only if the subject succeeded in illustrating the right type of action in the right order.

## Data analyses

First, participants were ranked according to their average score of the control test. Then we used a median split to divide them into two groups: players with High Spatial Abilities (HSA) and players with Low Spatial Abilities (LSA).

To evaluate the participant's ability to memorize the sequence, we analyzed the number of repetitions needed, the perceived mental

effort during the main test, and the recall scores. Based on these three variables, we calculated the learning efficiency using the three-dimensional formula elaborated by Tuovinen and Paas (2004). For the purpose of the present study, the number of repetitions was used instead of the study time (Khacharem et al., 2013). The formula consists in standardizing (z-transformation) the raw values obtained for each of the three variables.

$$ \text{Learning efficiency} = (z^{\text{Recall}} - z^{\text{Mental Effort}} - z^{\text{Repetitions}}) / \sqrt{3} $$

This formula was also used to estimate people's efficiency in learning from the presentation. For each dependent variable, individual means and standard deviations were calculated. Levene test was used to assess Homoscedasticity and Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for distribution normality. For the control test, a univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the level of spatial abilities and individual averages in the memorization test for the two groups (HSA and LSA). The significance level ($\alpha$) was set at 0.05 in all analyses and effect sizes were expressed by partial eta-squared ($\eta^2$). Partial eta squared values of 0.20, 0.50, and 0.80 represent small, moderate, and large effect sizes, respectively (e.g. Sechrest & Yeaton, 1982).

# Results

## Control test

Descriptive data for the control test are presented in Table 1. The univariate ANOVA for the control test showed a significant difference between groups [F(4.64)=101.5, p<0.001, $\eta^2$=0.68, and Power=1.00]. The HSA group performed better (M=15.47, SD=1.64) than the LSA group (M=9.2, SD=2.56).

## Main test

### Repetition

Univariate ANOVA for the number of repetitions revealed a significant effect for group [F(1,52)=30.26, p<0.001, $\eta^2$=0.39; Power=0.90]. Participants with HSA (M=3.16, SD=0.91) repeated the dynamic scene less than participants with LSA (M=5.12, SD=1.48) in order to memorize it.

<table><caption>**Table 1:** Descriptive table of the control test (VSA).</caption><thead><tr><th>Participants</th><th>Group</th><th>WLT</th><th>MRT</th><th>PFT</th><th>Average score</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2">Soccer players<br>(n=48)</td><td>HSA<br>(n=24)</td><td>7.45<br>(0.97)</td><td>12.12<br>(2.6)</td><td>15.66<br>(2.63)</td><td>15.47<br>(1.64)</td></tr><tr><td>LSA<br>(n=24)</td><td>4.16<br>(2.16)</td><td>5.91<br>(2.76)</td><td>11.29<br>(3.16)</td><td>9.2<br>(2.56)</td></tr></tbody></table>

WLT, water level task; MRT, mental rotation task; PFT, paper folding task.
## Mental effort

Univariate ANOVA for mental effort showed a significant effect for group [F(1.4)=15.23, p<0.001, η²=0.24; Power=1.00] indicating that the HSA group (M=2.29, SD=1.32) invested less mental effort in memorizing the dynamic sequence than the LSA group (M=3.62, SD=1.01).

## Recall accuracy

Univariate ANOVA for the recall accuracy revealed a significant effect for group [F(1,78)=20,73, p<0.001, η²=0.21; Power=1.00], participants with HSA (M=8.7, SD=1.12) had higher recall scores than those with LSA (M=7, SD=1.38).

## Learning efficiency

Univariate ANOVA for learning efficiency showed a significant effect for group [F(1,78)=40,48, p<0.001, η²=0.34; Power=1.00], Participants with HSA (M=0.99, SD=0.85) were more efficient in memorizing animation than participants with LSA (M=-0.99, SD=0.91). The data are illustrated in Figure 2.

## Discussion

In this study, we analyzed the effect of VSA on the memorization of a tactical soccer scene among soccer players. After dividing participants according to the control test, results confirmed the superiority of HSA over LSA in terms of VSA. Based on these results, differences observed between the two groups in the memorization test will be attributed to VSA.

Even though the chosen participants in this study were all professional soccer players, differences in terms of memorization were observed. Results of the main test showed that players with HSA achieved better learning efficiency scores than those with LSA. Specifically, with fewer repetitions, HSA remembered the scene better than LSA and invested less mental effort for the retention and the reproduction of the scene. The differences between elite soccer players could be explained by the ability-enhancer hypothesis (Brucker et al., 2014; Hegarty & Sims, 1994; Hegarty, 2005; Huk, 2006). Indeed, when treating and/or memorizing the tactical animation, players with HSA were able to devote more cognitive resources to be more performant (Isaak & Just, 1995; Mayer & Sim, 1994). These resources prevented the WM overload and enabled faster memorization as VSA impact visual information's processing and encoding speed (Hegarty & Kriz, 2008;

Salthouse, 1996). On the contrary, LSA found difficulties in managing the transient nature of the dynamic content which caused the loss of information and led to more repetitions. Our study illustrates this phenomenon as players with LSA repeated the animation about five times on average whereas those with HSA repeated it only about 3 times on average before judging they had completely memorized the scene.

In addition, previous studies in sports (Farrow, Reid, Buszard, & Kovalchik, 2018; Wood, Vine, & Wilson, 2016) admitted that a larger WM improved learning. Furthermore, according to Miyake et al. (2001), VSA are related to WM. That is to say, when the task requests WM treatments such as memorizing new visual information, HSA will be more efficient than LSA. The present study argues that HSA are able to mobilize almost all the storage capacity of the WM, unlike LSA who cannot mobilize it entirely (WM capacity: 7 ± 2 units of information; Miller, 1956). This difference was observed between the two groups in terms of recall scores. HSA remembered on average 8.7 pieces of information whereas LSA remembered only 7 pieces of information on average. This original finding yielded to a main questioning: is prior knowledge sufficient to define an athlete's memorization performance?

Unlike previous studies which considered that prior knowledge was elites' main quality (Khacharem, Zoudji, Kalyuga, & Ripoll, 2013; Khacharem et al., 2014; Zoudji et al., 2015), our study demonstrates that VSA are another essential factor that influences their memorization process. Even though information to memorize came from their specific domain field, LSA found difficulties to maintain all information of the dynamic support. Indeed, LSA can only manage the intrinsic cognitive load, because they only rely on their skilled memory (Ericsson & Kintsch, 1995) that helps them constructing mental representations based on chunks and/or patterns stored in LTM (Kalyuga, 2009). However, they are not able to manage the extrinsic

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2:** Mean scores of learning efficiency of the two groups. Bars represent the standard deviation of the associated mean values.</figcaption></figure>
cognitive load because their VSA are not sufficient to
handle the ephemeral nature of dynamic support. This may
explain the higher judgment of mental effort for LSA
compared to HSA. Furthermore, in some cases, incomplete
and inconsistent prior knowledge in a domain may lead to
wrong conclusions and harm future learning (Simon-
smeier, Flaig, Deiglmayr, & Schalk, 2018). In our situation,
we suppose that LSA were affected by some wrong infor-
mation previously acquired due to their low VSA. Subse-
quently, LSA generated errors during the recall even if they
took all the needed time to memorize the animation. It has
notably been demonstrated that VSA help managing high-
constraining situations (e.g. simultaneous processing and/
or cognitive overload conditions) and thus avoiding the
adoption of erroneous information (Isaak & Just, 1995).

The present research offers answers on learner's
characteristics that need to be considered when memo-
rizing animations. We also admit that a high level of prior
knowledge is not enough to define elite players' memori-
zation performance. This finding presents important im-
plications for developing coaching and learning from
dynamic presentations. From a practical point of view, we
advise sports stakeholders (e.g. players, trainers, coaches
and referees) with LSA to perform visuospatial training to
improve their VSA and thus their tactical expertise. Indeed,
studies in science, technology, engineering and mathe-
matics found mental rotation and spatial visualization
training had a positive impact on performance (Cheng &
Mix, 2014; Dimitriu, 2015; Lowrie, Logan, & Ramful, 2017;
Sorby, 2009). Some authors proposed additional tech-
niques such as visual guidance to optimize VSA training
(Roach, Fraser, Kryklywy, Mitchell, & Wilson, 2019). In
sport, training VSA could improve athletes' tactical
expertise with learning offensive and defensive patterns
(Lopes et al., 2009; Schorer et al., 2018; Tsai, 2018) and/or
perceptual skills such as anticipating penalty kicks for
goalkeepers (Murgia et al., 2014; Stinson & Bowman, 2014).
In addition, coaches could group players according to their
playing positions to optimize video training by targeting a
specific goal for each session. Then, VSA could improve
decision-making skills in time-poor processes such as
tactical game changes for coaches and/or offside decisions
for assistant referees (Put et al., 2016).

Even though this study yielded some original initial
findings, some limitations should be acknowledged. First,
this research was conducted on elite players. However,
beginners are also concerned about learning from dynamic
presentations. It is important to include beginners in future
research in order to verify the intervention of VSA accord-
ing to the level of expertise. Second, there are several types
of dynamic presentations, and it is important to include

other presentation conditions with different levels of real-
ism, such as video and virtual reality. This research will
aim at determining the appropriate combination between
learners' and presentations' characteristics to provide
optimal learning conditions. In addition, it could also be
useful to test visuospatial training on LSA players in order
to verify their effectiveness among athletes and provide
training methods.

To conclude, dynamic visualizations such as anima-
tion have strong properties that stimulate attention and
learning processes. However, our research shows that with
higher VSA these technologies can be capitalized more
fully in sport settings. This finding implies that VSA should
be taken into account and even be trained to benefit from
the instructional advantages of dynamic presentations and
improve athletes' performance on field.

**Research funding:** None declared.

**Author contributions:** All authors have accepted
responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript
and approved its submission.

**Competing interests:** Authors state no conflict of interest.

References

Baddeley, A. D. (2002). Is working memory still working?. *European Psychologist*, 7(2), 85-97.

Baddeley, A., Chincotta, D., & Adlam, A. (2001). Working memory and the control of action: Evidence from task switching. *Journal of Experimental Psychology: General*, 130(4), 641.

Berney, S., Bétrancourt, M., Molinari, G., & Hoyek, N. (2015). How spatial abilities and dynamic visualizations interplay when learning functional anatomy with 3D anatomical models: Interplay of spatial ability and dynamic visualization. *Anatomical Sciences Education*, 8(5), 452-462.

Black, A. A. (Jill). (2005). Spatial ability and earth science conceptual understanding. *Journal of Geoscience Education*, 53(4), 402–414.

Brucker, B., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2014). Learning with dynamic and static visualizations: Realistic details only benefit learners with high visuospatial abilities. *Computers in Human Behavior*, 36, 330-339.

Cha, K., Lee, E. Y., Heo, M. H., Shin, K. C., Son, J., & Kim, D. (2015). Analysis of climbing postures and movements in sport climbing for realistic 3D climbing animations. *Procedia Engineering*, 122, 52-57.

Cheng, Y., & Mix, K. (2014). Spatial training improves children's mathematics ability. *Journal of Cognition and Development*, 15(1), 2-11.

Choi, H.-H., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2014). Effects of the physical environment on cognitive load and learning: Towards a new model of cognitive load. *Educational Psychology Review*, 26(2), 225-244.

Çöltekin, A., Francelet, R., Richter, K.-F., Thoresen, J., & Fabrikant, S. I. (2018). The effects of visual realism, spatial abilities, and competition on performance in map-based route learning in men.
*Cartography and Geographic Information Science*, 45(4), 339–353.

Dimitriu, D. G. (2015). A, B, see... in 3D: A workbook to improve 3-D visualization skills. *Synthesis Lectures on Engineering*, 9(2), 1–148.

D'Oliveira, T. C. (2004). Dynamic spatial ability: An exploratory analysis and a confirmatory study. *The International Journal of Aviation Psychology*, 14(1), 19–38.

Ekstrom, R. B., Dermen, D., & Harman, H. H. (1976). *Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests*. Vol. 102. Princeton, NJ: Educational testing service.

Ericsson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory. *Psychological Review*, 102(2), 211–245.

Farrow, D., Reid, M., Buszard, T., & Kovalchik, S. (2018). Charting the development of sport expertise: Challenges and opportunities. *International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology*, 11(1), 238–257.

Garg, A. X., Norman, G., & Sperotable, L. (2001). How medical students learn spatial anatomy. *The Lancet*, 357(9253), 363–364.

Hall, C. R., & Pongrac, J. (1983). *Movement imagery: Questionnaire: London, Ontario: University of Western Ontario*.

Hays, T. A. (1996). Spatial abilities and the effects of computer animation on short-term and long-term comprehension. *Journal of Educational Computing Research*, 14(2), 139–155.

Hegarty, M. (2005). *Multimedia learning about physical systems* (pp. 447–465). New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978051186819.029.

Hegarty, M., & Kriz, S. (2008). Effects of knowledge and spatial ability on learning from animation. In R. Lowe & W. Schnotz (Eds.), *Learning with animation: Research implications for design* (pp. 103–29). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Hegarty, M., & Sims, V. K. (1994). Individual differences in mental animation during mechanical reasoning. *Memory & Cognition*, 22(4), 411–430.

Höffler, T. N. (2010). Spatial ability: Its influence on learning with visualizations—a meta-analytic review. *Educational Psychology Review*, 22(3), 245–269.

Höffler, T. N., & Leutner, D. (2011). The role of spatial ability in learning from instructional animations – evidence for an ability-as-compensator hypothesis. *Computers in Human Behavior*, 27(1), 209–216.

Huk, T. (2006). Who benefits from learning with 3D models? The case of spatial ability. *Journal of Computer Assisted Learning*, 22(6), 392–404.

Isaak, M. I., & Just, M. A. (1995). Constraints on the processing of rolling motion: The curcate cycloid illusion. *Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance*, 21(6), 1391.

Kalyuga, S. (2009). Knowledge elaboration: A cognitive load perspective. *Learning and Instruction*, 19(5), 402–410.

Kaushal, R. K., & Panda, S. N. (2019). A meta analysis on effective conditions to offer animation based teaching style. *Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction*, 16(1), 129–153.

Khacharem, A., Zoudji, B., Kalyuga, S., & Ripoll, H. (2013). Developing tactical skills through the use of static and dynamic soccer visualizations: An expert-nonexpert differences investigation. *Journal of Applied Sport Psychology*, 25(3), 326–340.

Khacharem, A., Zoudji, B., & Ripoll, H. (2013). Effect of presentation format and expertise on attacking-drill memorization in soccer. *Journal of Applied Sport Psychology*, 25(2), 234–248.

Khacharem, A., Zoudji, B., Spanjers, I. A. E., & Kalyuga, S. (2014). Improving learning from animated soccer scenes: Evidence for the expertise reversal effect. *Computers in Human Behavior*, 35, 339–349.

Kozina, Z. L., Sobko, I., Yermakova, T., Cieslicka, M., Zhukov, V., Chia, M., & Korobeinik, V. A. (2016). Psychophysiological characteristics of female basketball players with hearing problems as the basis for the technical tactic training methodic in world level teams. *Journal of Physical Education and Sport*. 16(4), 1348–1359.

Kriz, S., & Hegarty, M. (2007). Top-down and bottom-up influences on learning from animations. *International Journal of Human-Computer Studies*, 65(11), 911–930.

Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. *Applied Cognitive Psychology*, 25(6), 943–951.

Linn, M. C., & Petersen, A. C. (1985). Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: A meta-analysis. *Child development* 56(6), 1479–1498.

Loftus, J. J., Jacobsen, M., & Wilson, T. D. (2018). The relationship between spatial ability, cerebral blood flow and learning with dynamic images: A transcranial Doppler ultrasonography study. *Medical Teacher*, 40(2), 174–180.

Lopes, A., Pires, B., Cardoso, M., Santos, A., Peixinho, F., Sequeira, P., ... Foguet, O. C. (2009). Use of a virtual world system in sports coach education for reproducing team handball movements. *Journal For Virtual Worlds Research*, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.4101/jvwr.v2i1.399.

Lowe, R., & Boucheix, J. M. (2008). Learning from animated diagrams: How are mental models built? In *International conference on theory and application of diagrams*. (pp. 266–281). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87730-1_25.

Lowe, R., & Boucheix, J.-M. (2011). Cueing complex animations: Does direction of attention foster learning processes? *Learning and Instruction*, 21(5), 650–663.

Lowe, R., & Boucheix, J. M. (2017). A composition approach to design of educational animations. In *Learning from dynamic visualization* (pp. 5–30). Cham: Springer.

Lowrie, T., Logan, T., & Ramful, A. (2017). Visuospatial training improves elementary students' mathematics performance. *British Journal of Educational Psychology*, 87, 170–186.

Mayer, R. E. (2012). Information processing. In *Theories, constructs, and critical issues*. Vol. 1 (pp. 85–99). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Mayer, R. E., & Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. *Journal of Educational Psychology*, 86(3), 389.

Miller, G.A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. *Psychological Review*, 63, 81–97.

Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Rettinger, D. A., Shah, P., & Hegarty, M. (2001). How are visuospatial working memory, executive functioning, and spatial abilities related? A latent-variable analysis. *Journal of Experimental Psychology: General*, 130(4), 621.
Murgia, M., Sors, F., Muroni, A. F., Santoro, I., Prpic, V., Galmonte, A., & Agostini, T. (2014). Using perceptual home-training to improve anticipation skills of soccer goalkeepers. *Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 15*(6), 642–648.

Paas, F. G. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. *Journal of Educational Psychology, 84*(4), 429–434.

Paas, F. G., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. (1993). The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combine mental effort and performance measures. *Human factors, 35*(4), 737–743.

Paas, F. G., Van Merriënboer, J. J., & Adam, J. J. (1994). Measurement of cognitive load in instructional research. *Perceptual & Motor Skills, 79*(1), 419–430.

Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. *Educational Psychologist, 38*(1), 1–4.

Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. *Educational Psychologist, 38*(1), 63–71.

Peck, E. M., Yuksel, B. F., Harrison, L., Ottley, A. & Chang, R. (2012). Towards a 3-dimensional model of individual cognitive differences: Position paper. In *Beyond time & errors–novel evaluation methods for visualization (Proceedings of BELIV 2012)*. (pp. 1–6). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2442576.2442582.

Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1956). *The child's conception of space*. New York: Norton.

Put, K., Wagemans, J., Spitz, J., Williams, A. M., & Helsen, W. F. (2016). Using web-based training to enhance perceptual-cognitive skills in complex dynamic offside events. *Journal of Sports Sciences, 34*(2), 181–189.

Ripoll, H., Zoudji, B., & Llucia, L (2009). Utiliser des images pour entraîner au football. In B. Zoudji (Ed.), *Science & football: Recherches et Connaissances Actuelles* (pp. 355–361). Valenciennes: Presses Universitaires de Valenciennes.

Roach, V. A., Fraser, G. M., Kryklywy, J. H., Mitchell, D. G., & Wilson, T. D. (2019). Guiding low spatial ability individuals through visual cueing: The dual importance of where and when to look. *Anatomical Sciences Education, 12*(1), 32–42.

Salthouse, T. A. (1996). The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. *Psychological Review, 103*(3), 403–428.

Schorer, J., Schapschröer, M., Fischer, L., Habben, J., & Baker, J. (2018). An augmented perceptual-cognitive intervention using a pattern recall paradigm with junior soccer players. *Frontiers in Psychology, 9*, 1260.

Sechrest, L., & Yeaton, W. H. (1982). Magnitudes of experimental effects in social science. *Research, 6* Evaluation REV. 579–585.

Simonsmeier, B. A., Flaig, M., Deiglmayr, A., Schalk, L., & Schneider, M. (2018). *Domain-specific prior knowledge and learning: A meta-analysis*. Trier, Germany: Research Synthesis 2018. https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.844.

Sorby, S. A. (2009). Educational research in developing 3-D spatial skills for engineering students. *International Journal of Science Education, 31*(3), 459–480.

Souriac-Poirier, P., Thon, B., & Cadopi, M. (2008). Mémorisation d'une séquence gestuelle en fonction de l'expertise, des capacités d'imagerie et de rotation mentale. *Staps, 81*(3), 23.

Stinson, C., & Bowman, D. A. (2014). Feasibility of training athletes for high-pressure situations using virtual reality. *IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 20*(4), 606–615.

Swann, C., Moran, A., & Piggott, D. (2015). Defining elite athletes: Issues in the study of expert performance in sport psychology. *Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 16*, 3–14.

Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). *Cognitive load theory*. New York: Springer.

Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. *Educational Psychology Review, 31*(2), 261–292.

Thurstone, L. L., & Thurstone, T. G. (1967). *Manuel d'application pour le test spatial*. Paris: Les Editions du Centre de Psychologie Appliquée.

Toivainen, T., Pannini, G., Papageorgiou, K. A., Malanchini, M., Rimfeld, K., Shakeshaft, N., & Kovas, Y. (2018). Prenatal testosterone does not explain sex differences in spatial ability. *Scientific Reports, 8*. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-31704-y.

Tsai, W. L. (2018, June). Personal basketball coach: Tactic training through wireless virtual reality. In *Proceedings of the 2018 ACM on international conference on multimedia retrieval Yokohama, Japan* (pp. 481–484). https://doi.org/10.1145/3206025.3206084.

Tuovinen, J. E., & Paas, F. (2004). Exploring multidimensional approaches to the efficiency of instructional conditions. *Instructional Science, 32*(1–2), 133–152.

Uttal, D. H., Miller, D. I., & Newcombe, N. S. (2013). Exploring and enhancing spatial thinking. *Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22*(5), 367–373.

Vandenberg, S. G., & Kuse, A. R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. *Perceptual & Motor Skills, 47*(2), 599–604.

Wood, G., Vine, S. J., & Wilson, M. R. (2016). Working memory capacity, controlled attention and aiming performance under pressure. *Psychological Research, 80*(4), 510–517.

Yilmaz, H. B. (2017). On the development and measurement of spatial ability. *International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 1*(2), 83–96.

Zoudji, B., Khacharem, A., & Porter, R. (2015). Effects of time on memorization of soccer scenes. Presentation formats and expertise reversal effect. *International Journal of Sport Psychology, 46*(5), 456–479.