# Gaze Behavior and Positioning of Referee Teams during Three-Point Shots in Basketball
## 3 Results
### Gaze at the Areas of Interest
Univariate analyses of variance showed that different phases of observation had different effects on the referees' gaze at the basket, \(F(1.41,\) 211.55) = 51.02, \(p\) \(<\) 0.001, _[PERSON]'s f_ = 0.574; shooter, \(F(1.24,\) 185.46) = 55.24, \(p\) \(<\) 0.001, _[PERSON]'s f_ = 0.599; offense, \(F(1.35,\) 202.95) = 5.14, \(p\) = 0.015, _[PERSON]'s f_ = 0.165; defense, \(F(1.68,\) 252.06) = 6.4, \(p\) = 0.003, _[PERSON]'s f_ = 0.189; the zone, \(F(1.6,\) 239.86) = 9.17, \(p\) \(<\) 0.001, _[PERSON]'s f_ = 0.232; other referees, \(F(1.71,\) 257.06) = 10.03, \(p\) \(<\) 0.001, _[PERSON]'s f_ = 0.244; the three-point line, \(F(1.1,\) 165.57) = 11.034, \(p\) = 0.001, _[PERSON]'s f_ = 0.257. Post-hoc pairwise comparisons showed that in phase 1, the basket (\(M\) = 0.00, \(SD\) = 0.00), defense (\(M\) = 7.05, \(SD\) = 12.19), and zone (\(M\) = 2.99, \(SD\) = 7.93) were less fixated on than in phase 2 (\(M\) = 17.61, \(SD_{\text{basket}}\) = 10.67; \(M_{\text{defense}}\) = 13.30, \(SD_{\text{defense}}\) = 13.99; \(M_{\text{zame}}\) = 8.54, \(SD_{\text{zame}}\) = 16.95) and phase 3 (\(M_{\text{basket}}\) = 29.37, \(SD_{\text{basket}}\) = 20.05; \(M_{\text{defense}}\) = 17.77, \(SD_{\text{defense}}\) = 19.25; \(M_{\text{zame}}\) = 12.59, \(SD_{\text{zame}}\) = 16.95; all \(ps\) \(<\) 0.01). Moreover, in phase 1, the three-point line (\(M\) = 6.36, \(SD\) = 13.41) was looked at more than in phase 2 (\(M\) = 0.36, \(SD\) = 3.32, \(p\) = 0.002) and 3 (\(M\) = 0.22, \(SD\) = 1.15, \(p\) = 0.004). The shooter was fixated on for longer in phase 1 (\(M\) = 29.36, \(SD\) = 24.37) than in phase 2 (\(M\) = 8.27, \(SD\) = 9.66, \(p\) \(<\) 0.001) and 3 (\(M\) = 0.15, \(SD\) = 1.01, \(p\) \(<\) 0.001). Additionally, in phase 2, the fixation duration on the shooter was longer than in phase 3 (\(p\) \(<\) 0.001). In phase 2 (\(M\) = 22.98, \(SD\) = 22.57), the offense was fixated on more than in phase 1 (\(M\) = 11.99, \(SD\) = 21.49, \(p\) = 0.02) and 3 (\(M\) = 16.08, \(SD\) = 19.76, \(p\) = 0.001). Moreover, the referees looked at each other more in phase 2 (\(M\) = 2.90, \(SD\) = 4.18), compared to phase 3 (\(M\) = 0.00, \(SD\) = 0.00, \(p\) \(<\) 0.001). Univariate analyses of variance of significant (and multivariate) interaction effects showed that there was an interaction effect of time and relation to the ball with respect to the gaze time of the referees on the shooter, \(F(1.24,\) 185.46) = 3.8, \(p\) = 0.040, _[PERSON]'s f_ = 0.136, and an interaction effect _of_ time and referees' role with respect to the gaze time at the basket, \(F(2.82,\) 252.06) = 5.44, \(p\) = 0.001, _[PERSON]'s f_ = 0.221, and at the offense, \(F(2.7,\) 252.06) = 5.45, \(p\) = 0.002, _[PERSON]'s f_ = 0.217. Post-hoc analyses showed that fixation times on the shooter decreased from phase 1 to phase 3 regardless of the relation to the ball. However, in phase 1 and phase 2, referees looked more at the shooter when in a far-away position compared to a position nearby the ball, whereas this was not the case in phase 3. Fixation times on the ball of Trail and Center referees increased more during the trajectory of the ball/shot than fixation times of the Lead referee. For the offense, no differences in the fixation times were observed for phase 1 and 2 between the referees' roles, but the fixations significantly increased for the Center role compared to the Trail and Lead referee. Furthermore, the referee/referees near the ball, spent more time looking at the basket in phase 3 in comparison to the referees in a position further away from the ball. When it came to the shooters, fixation times of the referees decreased during the trajectory of the ball/shot.