Performance is not always symmetrical. Comparing both sides can reveal differences in response, coordination, precision and control that may otherwise go unnoticed.
Every athletic action begins with information. The athlete sees a situation, processes what is happening, selects a response and then moves.
Our assessments explore selected parts of this process through structured visual and cognitive tasks. We look at response timing, accuracy, inhibition, visual attention and differences between the left and right sides.
Individual drills measure different things. The results can help identify strengths and areas that may benefit from further training.
An athlete may look physically prepared, but small differences in how information is processed and acted upon can affect the quality of a response.
The response is quick, but the athlete does not reach the correct target.
The correct response arrives, but timing may be a limiting factor.
One side may respond differently from the other in a comparable task.
The athlete responds when the task requires them to hold back.
Relevant signals may be overlooked when several things happen at once.
Maintaining visual attention on a moving target can become challenging.
Five areas help build a broader picture of visual and cognitive performance. The profile makes it easier to see where performance is stronger and where further development may be useful.
Illustrative values only — not actual athlete results or a measure of absolute potential. The outer boundary represents the 100% scale.
Four measurements. A closer look at response timing, movement execution, spatial precision and synchronization.
What it shows: Time from stimulus presentation to the recorded response. It reflects response initiation, not movement duration.
What it shows: Time from response initiation to completion of the movement, as defined by the task.
What it shows: Distance and direction between the intended target and the recorded touch location.
What it shows: The recorded interval between response and movement onset. Interpretation depends on how the task defines each event.
Comparing both sides helps identify patterns in response speed, movement execution and spatial precision. Each result needs to be interpreted in the context of the task and repeated movement measurements.
Illustrative sample data only — not an actual athlete assessment. The curves are visual examples, not recorded trial data. The 2D values show an example deviation, not a confirmed left-right comparison. Differences do not independently establish a neurological or muscular diagnosis.
Looking beyond a single score can help reveal how an athlete responds, how accurately they act, how they track moving targets and whether performance differs between sides.
The time between a stimulus appearing and the athlete initiating a response.
How far a touch or response lands from the intended target position.
Whether the athlete selects and executes the correct response for the task.
The ability to follow a moving target, maintain visual attention and track changes in its position over time.
Compare response time, motor time, accuracy and spatial precision where the task provides these measurements.
Compare the same measures under comparable conditions to identify possible side-to-side differences.
Speed is only one part of performance. A faster response is not automatically a better response. Timing, accuracy and the demands of the task need to be considered together.
In sport, reacting to every signal is not always the right choice. Sometimes the athlete must hold back, ignore a distraction or wait for the correct cue.
The athlete must identify the relevant stimulus and initiate the required response.
The athlete must recognise a signal that requires them to stop or avoid responding.
Inhibition tasks examine response control under specific test conditions. They do not, on their own, measure every aspect of decision-making in a real sporting situation.
Different sports place different demands on visual attention, response selection, timing and movement. These examples show how selected components can be explored in an assessment setting.
Reading visual cues, tracking the puck, anticipating a shot and organising a rapid response. Assessment tasks can examine selected components of visual attention, response timing and accuracy — they do not predict saves.
Following the ball, detecting relevant cues and preparing a forehand or backhand response under changing time pressure.
Taking in information before receiving the ball, identifying options and selecting a response while the situation changes.
Tracking the ball, reading the movements of opponents and teammates, and selecting a pass, shot or defensive response under time pressure.
Research helps explain why visual attention, response control and decision-making are important parts of athletic performance. Each study examines a specific question — not a complete measure of sporting ability.
Compared gaze behaviour in five elite and five amateur male goalkeepers during on-ice situations. The study reported differences in fixation patterns and quiet-eye duration. The small sample is an important limitation to keep in mind.
READ THE STUDY ↗This review examined research comparing inhibitory control in athletes and non-athletes, exploring how the ability to stop or withhold a response relates to sporting expertise.
READ THE STUDY ↗Reviewed research on decision-making in team sports, including the role of contextual information, task demands and the conditions in which athletes make decisions.
READ THE STUDY ↗Examined movement characteristics associated with accurate and inaccurate handball attempts, illustrating the importance of considering response quality alongside speed.
READ THE STUDY ↗Build a clearer picture of performance. Identify areas to work on and follow progress over time.
Discover what your visual and cognitive performance profile can tell you — and where focused training may help.
BOOK YOUR ASSESSMENT