Author(s): TIERCERY, M., VU, A., LECOMPTE, J., CARLING, C., BIDEAU, B., ANTHONY, A., Institution: FFF, Country: FRANCE, Abstract-ID: 2389

INTRODUCTION:
In modern football, goalkeepers are increasingly required to participate in build-up play, making rapid and accurate decisions under complex tactical constraints.
From a perception–action perspective, decision making in sport emerges from the continuous coupling between environmental information, visual exploration, and motor behavior, making visual information acquisition a central determinant of performance. Recent research highlights the importance of representative and embodied environments for studying these processes and emphasizes the potential of immersive technologies such as virtual reality to support ecologically valid assessment and training (Johnson et al., 2025). This study examined whether immersive virtual reality (VR) preserves coherent decision-making patterns compared to traditional visualization formats.

Johnson, J. G. (2025). Decision making in sports. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 102919.
METHODS:
Thirty-three elite goalkeeper coaches evaluated back-pass situations under three conditions: 2D overhead view, broadcast video, and immersive first-person VR. In each condition, participants selected passing options according to two distinct tactical objectives: “Maintain Possession” (MP) and “Advance Play” (AP), reflecting conservative and progressive build-up strategies. Decision consistency was assessed using Krippendorff’s alpha for both inter-rater agreement (between coaches) and intra-rater agreement (within coaches across modalities). Visual exploratory activity (VEA) was quantified in VR using headset tracking data.
RESULTS:
For MP decisions, inter-rater agreement ranged from α = 0.54 to 0.60 across 2D, video, and VR conditions, corresponding to moderate-to-substantial agreement, with no significant differences between visualization formats. For AP decisions, agreement was lower (α = 0.39–0.42), reflecting fair-to-moderate consensus, without significant differences between conditions. Intra-rater analyses showed moderate consistency across modalities for both game plans, indicating stable individual decision patterns. VEA was positively associated with decision quality, as reflected by greater alignment with peer consensus and with a greater intra-rater agreement.
CONCLUSION:
These findings demonstrate that immersive VR preserves the fundamental mechanisms underpinning tactical decision-making in traditional visualization methods, while encouraging active information-seeking behavior. Furthermore, VEA appears to play a critical role in supporting coherent and consistent decision-making under increased tactical complexity. Overall, immersive VR represents a promising assessment environment for goalkeeper decision-making, combining experimental control with representative perceptual engagement (involvement). Future research should investigate longitudinal training effects and transfer to on-field performance.