| Title |
Tactical expertise assessment in youth football using representative tasks
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-016-2955-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jaime Serra-Olivares, Filipe Manuel Clemente, Sixto González-Víllora |
| Abstract |
Specific football drills improve the development of technical/tactical and physical variables in players. Based on this principle, in recent years it has been possible to observe in daily training a growing volume of small-sided and conditioned games. These games are smaller and modified forms of formal games that augment players' perception of specific tactics. Despite this approach, the assessment of players' knowledge and tactical execution has not been well documented, due mainly to the difficulty in measuring tactical behavior. For that reason, this study aims to provide a narrative review about the tactical assessment of football training by using representative tasks to measure the tactical expertise of youth football players during small-sided and conditioned games. This study gives an overview of the ecological approach to training and the principles used for representative task design, providing relevant contribution and direction for future research into the assessment of tactical expertise in youth football. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 6% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 6% |
| Sweden | 1 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| Australia | 1 | 6% |
| Portugal | 1 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 75% |
| Scientists | 4 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 174 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 174 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 32 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 7% |
| Professor | 11 | 6% |
| Other | 28 | 16% |
| Unknown | 47 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 100 | 57% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 1% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 9 | 5% |
| Unknown | 49 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 August 2017.
All research outputs
#3,032,313
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#165
of 1,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,223
of 377,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#25
of 271 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,876 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 377,479 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 271 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.