Introduction
Examining the specifics of perception, particularly the ability to evaluate size and the related ability to perform a respective action, represents a peculiar area of study. Specifically, the correlation between the ability to assess the size of an object and take respective actions to grab or hit it represents a strong potential. By setting a clear goal correlated with relevant implications and providing a solid methodological approach for conducting the analysis, Witt and Proffitt (2005) have offered a unique insight into the issue.
Study Purpose and Research Question
Witt and Proffitt’s (2005) study’s goal can be summarized as examining discrepancies and inconsistencies in size perception, particularly among sports players. The authors test the question of whether changes in perception of objects, particularly those observed during sports games, can be regarded as a part of objective reality. The authors also incorporate factors such as age and sex into the assessment.
Study Procedure and Methodology
Witt and Proffitt (2005) used a sample size of 47 players to conduct a psychological experiment that was expected to take one minute. Therefore, the researchers adopted the quantitative research design, particularly the quasi-experiment framework. The specified strategy was particularly conducive to testing the accuracy of the proposed hypothesis.
Study Findings
The research has proven that there was no evident correlation between the perceived size of the ball and the probability of the player hitting it successfully. Specifically, the researchers tested the hypothesis with players of different age ranges and sex, with negative results returning in each case. Therefore, the perception of the ball size has been confirmed to have a plausible effect on the rates of players’ success in hitting it.
Comparative Study or Anecdote
Remarkably, the outcomes of the experiment set in the article did not correlate with the researchers’ expectations. Therefore, the anecdotes represented in the article mainly relate to the instances in which a correlation was, indeed, identified. Nonetheless, Witt and Proffitt (2005) mention that similar outcomes were obtained in a previous study that sought to examine the effects of the perceiver’s behavioral potential on the specified elements of reality. Therefore, there are reasons to believe that the obtained research results do reflect the actual situation accurately.
Perception vs. Physical Reality
Given the consistency in the study outcomes, namely, the apparent denial of the connection between participants’ perceptions of reality and their ability to hit the ball, one could argue that the article supports the concept of objectivity in perception. In other words, the results of the study point to the fact that perception is, in fact, an objective representation of the outside world. Indeed, if it were not, the participants would have had a warped perception of the ball whenever it changed, which would have informed their ability to hit it successfully.
Proposed Study with Different Sport or Task
A similar study could be carried out to test the accuracy of perceptions among members of different cultures. Specifically, the perceived image of specific colors in people belonging to various cultural communities in different scenarios could shed light on the unique aspects of human perception. The results could be predicted to demonstrate slight differences in color perception due to the associated cultural interpretations of their meaning.
Conclusion
By identifying real-life implications of the problem set in the research, building a robust methodological approach and conducting meticulous analysis, Witt and Proffitt (2005) have provided insightful and quite curious results. Specifically, the study is essential in further developing the understanding of perception and its formation in people. The specified research outcomes may inform the development of the relevant technology supporting the needs of people with vision issues and the associated health concerns.
Reference
Witt, J. K., & Proffitt, D. R. (2005). See the ball, hit the ball. Psychological Science Cambridge, 16(12), 937.