on sub-conscious (automatic) shooting (paper)

If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true

Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H

Forum rules
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
Post Reply
scerir
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 11:09 am
Location: Rome - Italy

on sub-conscious (automatic) shooting (paper)

Post by scerir »

It seems an interesting paper, technical, and difficult (at least for me). But worth reading

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... 15-214.pdf
Gwhite
Posts: 3427
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 6:04 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: on sub-conscious (automatic) shooting (paper)

Post by Gwhite »

That's going to be some heavy reading. I wish Google had a jargon to English translator...
Ricardo
Posts: 254
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Re: on sub-conscious (automatic) shooting (paper)

Post by Ricardo »

It's interesting that of the shots classified as "automatic", the majority were "suboptimal", while "controlled" shots were more successful overall. If I read this correctly, the "controlled" aspect of these shots was paying attention to the sights, while triggering was "automatic". The paper doesn't address whether the shots broke consciously or not. I suspect not, because attention was on the sights. For non-neuroscientists, it seems to reinforce things we've been saying all along. I think the EKGs reveal more to people who know how to read them. Anyone out there?
william
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:31 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: on sub-conscious (automatic) shooting (paper)

Post by william »

Freakin' angels dancing on the freakin' head of a freakin' pin!
scerir
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 11:09 am
Location: Rome - Italy

Re: on sub-conscious (automatic) shooting (paper)

Post by scerir »

Ricardo wrote:It's interesting that of the shots classified as "automatic", the majority were "suboptimal", while "controlled" shots were more successful overall. If I read this correctly, the "controlled" aspect of these shots was paying attention to the sights, while triggering was "automatic". The paper doesn't address whether the shots broke consciously or not. I suspect not, because attention was on the sights. For non-neuroscientists, it seems to reinforce things we've been saying all along. I think the EKGs reveal more to people who know how to read them. Anyone out there?
Few more informations about that paper. Many tests were performed, with many Italian top shooters (not just one top shooter, as said in that paper), during 6 or 7 years. One of the specific intents was to study (with the aid of those instruments) the moment when the optimal "automatic" (sub-conscious?) shooting performance becomes "non-automatic" (non sub-conscious?), and to study the possibility, or the very conditions, to recover the "automatic" (optimal) shooting as soon as possible. Of course shooters provided specific feedbacks and self-evaluations (about the optimality or sub-optimality of their performances). No strategy (effective in general, for *every* shooter, and at *any* time) has been found (as far as I could understand). s.
Post Reply