Basketball players beat sportswriters in this prediction game

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American



On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Score one for athletes over sportswriters: Basketball players are nearly twice as good as sportswriters at predicting whether a shot will go in the basket.

According to new research appearing in Nature Neuroscience, 'ballers can imagine the shooting motion of another player to predict whether a basketball shot is headed for nothing but net or will brick off the rim. The key to their trick: the muscles that control the pinky finger.

Sportswriters’ pinky fingers, it seems, are too busy hitting “return” and punctuating.

Researchers at Rome's Sapienza University showed footage of a man shooting free throws to 10 players from Italy's professional basketball league, five coaches, five sports journalists and 10 college students, who do not play the game. Their task: Predict whether the shooter's next shot will go in.

The scientists froze the video at a number of points in the ball's trajectory, starting before it was released all the way through the swish or airball. Basketball players got the right answer 70 percent of the time—even if the shooter was still holding the ball. The non-athletes were accurate 40 percent of the time.

When the researchers repeated the test—this time while using a technique called transcranial magnetic stimulation to track activity in the subjects' brains—they noted two brain areas that control two arm muscles turned on in the basketball stars, but not in the other groups. The muscles extend from the elbow to the wrist and from the wrist to the pinky finger.

So, elite basketball players—like those hooping it up at the Olympics in China—seem to be actually going through the motions in their head. And if they think the ball is going astray, their brain activity intensifies—as if they are trying to correct the shot.

“The more you do something, the more it is embodied in you,” Scott Grafton, a cognitive neuroscientist at the University of California, Santa Barbara told Science News. “It doesn’t just change your muscle memory, it changes the way you see the world around you.”

The researchers didn't give any indication which team might take home the Olympic gold medal in basketball. They may not be paying attention—Italy didn't qualify for the games.

(Photo: iStockphoto/William Fuller)

 

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe