Introduction: The aim of this investigation was to assess the construct and ecological validity and reliability of a simulated laboratory test of stroke preparation in cricket batting. Methodology: 13 skilled and 12 novice male right handed batsmen were recruited to take part in this study over a series of in-situ and laboratory tests, which measured a participant’s response foot responses to delivery lengths ranging from 0-14 metres from the stumps in the nets and during video simulation of the same deliveries, the reliability of the laboratory test performance was compared using a test vs. re-test protocol and construct validity assessed by comparing skilled vs. novice laboratory movement responses. Results: A significant correlation between skilled in-situ vs. laboratory foot movements (front foot, r (11) = .93 p < .01, and back foot, r (11) = .81 p < .01), and no significant differences found in foot movements the majority of delivery lengths (front foot, 3 – 5m, 5 – 7m, & 10 – 14m, and back foot, 0 – 3m, 5 – 7m, & 10 – 14m). These results were replicated in the test vs. re-test condition investigation (front foot, r (11) = .98 p < .01, and back foot, r (11) = .98 p < .01), The protocol was also able to differentiate between skill levels with no significant relationships found between movement transitions (front foot, r (10) = -.01 >.05 and back foot, r (10) = .05 >.05), and significant differences between response proportions (front foot, 0 – 1m & 7 – 14m, and back foot, 6 – 14m) and response magnitudes (front foot, 6 – 14m, and back foot, 6 – 14m) Conclusion: The laboratory protocol elicits similar direction of foot movements when compared to in-situ and are done so reliably. Additionally, skill-based differences are found on the test.
|Publication status||Published - 2012|