Discussion and Conclusion

The first major theme was attention; which clearly showcased the differences in how advanced players directed their attention during performance compared to the amateur athletes. Amateur athletes demonstrated higher frequencies of game-focused attention (62 to 24), outcome monitoring (97 to 22), tactical awareness (33 to 15) and decision-making verbalisations (11 to 7). Statements such as “That’s not in,” and “Close shot,” illustrate how the amateur athletes frequently monitored outcomes and consciously processed performance-related information. In contrast, advanced athletes displayed substantially greater confidence in team ability (84 to 14) and lower levels of low self-confidence (20 to 54). Therefore, these findings suggest that amateur athletes devoted more cognitive resources toward evaluating ongoing internal performance and considering possible actions due possible lack in experience and automated skills (Wulf, 2013). In contrast, the evidence suggests that the same internal skill set is automated for advanced athletes due to higher levels of experience, thus permitting these players to process more relevant in-game information without needing to verbalise every decision or outcome (Wulf, 2013). These findings are further supported by research that suggests how basketball players of an elite level are better able to identify relevant cues, ignore irrelevant information and make rapid decisions compared to novice performers (Jin et al., 2023). Additionally, research argues that attentional focus becomes increasingly refined as experience develops (Monsma et al., 2017). Furthermore, this research aligns with the concept that advanced level athletes appear to focus on meaningful environmental information whilst avoiding excessive attention to outcomes (Huffman et al., 2022).

The second theme, refocusing, highlights the differences in how athletes responded to mistakes. Amateur athletes demonstrated more attentional re-engagement (29 to 5) and self-correction behaviours (25 to 9), with statements such as “I need to take me time,” and “Rebound, rebound.” While these behaviours show attempts to regain focus, they may also indicate greater attentional disruption following errors. In contrast, advanced athletes displayed fewer corrective verbalizations, suggesting they were able to recover attention more efficiently. This evidence aligns with research that suggests experienced athletes possess stronger attentional control and emotional regulation (Tasi J. M., 2023). Greater confidence in team ability may also have enabled advanced athletes to move on from mistakes more quickly than amateur athletes (Bandura, C. T., & Kavussanu, M., 2018). 

Finally, communication emerged as the strongest leadership-related theme. Amateur athletes displayed considerably more in-game communication (179 to 54), largely focused on coordinating play and directing teammates. However, advanced athletes demonstrated higher levels of confidence-building communication and team encouragement, including statements such as “We’ve got this,” and “Let’s go.” These behaviours are consistent with transformational and identity leadership theories, which emphasise motivation, team cohesion and collective confidence (Butalia et al., 2024; Mach et al., 2022). Therefore, these findings suggest that advanced athletes do not necessarily communicate more but rather they communicate differently, utilising leadership behaviours to support team morale and performance (Oh Y., 2023). 

A strength of this study was the use of a pilot session which permitted athletes to become familiar with the technology used and start to gain an understanding of thinking aloud. Additionally, the TA methodology is a strength in itself as it provides clear insights into an athlete’s real-time thought processes during competitive performance (Quick, S., & Lyle, J., 2024). Moreover, through comparing the data between advanced and amateur level athletes, this helps to provide a clearer understanding of the differences in certain behaviours and cognitive processes. However, there is also a limitation with this as there is no middle ground to bridge the gap between the elite and novice level. 

This study was also limited by the small sample size which consisted of only four participants, which would heavily limit the generalisability of the findings. Additionally, not all participants attended every data collection session, resulting in unequal participation across weeks. Moreover, technical issues, including go-pro malfunctions and recordings not being saved resulted in missing data and reduced the total number of recordings available for analysis. Another limitation was the lack of complete standardisation across sessions with game durations varying from a seven-minute duration to a five-minute duration. Similarly, thirty-second timeouts were implemented once every two minutes during gameplay of the final session, but was either inconsistent or lacking in the other three data collection sessions. This further limits the standardisation of the data across each collection session. 

Therefore, future studies should recruit larger samples across multiple sporting levels and competitive contexts to determine whether the patterns observed in the present study generalise to broader athlete populations. Additionally, athletes should be held accountable for participation to collect a more accurate data sample.