Xu Shi
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Xu Shi has a total of 9 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Chuntian Wang
College of Psychology, Beijing Sport University, Beijing, BJ, China
1 shared publication - Guanchen Zhou
School of Competitive Sports, Beijing Sport University, Beijing 100084, China
1 shared publication - Haoping Yang
School of Psychology, Beijing Sport University, Beijing 100084, China
1 shared publication - Jialian Cao
School of Physical Education, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, China
1 shared publication - Senlin Lan
School of Competitive Sports, Beijing Sport University, Beijing 100084, China
1 shared publication - Xiaotong Wang
School of Psychology, Beijing Sport University, Beijing 100084, China
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 16 July 2026
- Published by MDPI AG in Behavioral Sciences
- Vol. 16 (7) , 1203
Badminton Players’ Expert Advantage in Anticipation Based on Visual and Auditory Cues: Evidence from the Drift Diffusion Model
Anticipation is central to perceptual–cognitive expertise in badminton, but the decision mechanisms through which experts use visual and auditory cues remain unclear. This study examined expert–novice differences in unimodal anticipation and latent decision processes estimated by a hierarchical drift diffusion model (HDDM). Sixty-six participants (33 experts and 33 novices) completed a landing-region anticipation task under visual-only and auditory-only conditions. Behavioral performance was analyzed using mixed analyses of variance (ANOVAs), and accuracy and reaction time were jointly modeled with HDDM parameters: boundary separation (a), drift rate (v), non-decision time (t), and starting-point bias (z). Experts showed higher overall accuracy than novices, F(1, 64) = 56.46, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.469, whereas reaction time did not differ significantly by group. The auditory-only condition produced higher accuracy, F(1, 64) = 12.69, p = 0.001, ηp2 = 0.165, but longer reaction times, F(1, 64) = 150.32, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.701. HDDM results showed higher drift rates in experts under both visual-only (BF10 = 1992.845) and auditory-only (BF10 = 24.354) conditions; auditory-only anticipation also involved higher boundary separation (BF10 = 53.095). These findings suggest that badminton expertise is associated with higher anticipatory accuracy and more efficient evidence accumulation under unimodal cue conditions, while auditory-only anticipation may also involve a more cautious decision threshold.
- 16 July 2026
- Published by MDPI AG in Behavioral Sciences
- Vol. 16 (7) , 1203
Open AccessBadminton Players’ Expert Advantage in Anticipation Based on Visual and Auditory Cues: Evidence from the Drift Diffusion Model
Anticipation is central to perceptual–cognitive expertise in badminton, but the decision mechanisms through which experts use visual and auditory cues remain unclear. This study examined expert–novice differences in unimodal anticipation and latent decision processes estimated by a hierarchical drift diffusion model (HDDM). Sixty-six participants (33 experts and 33 novices) completed a landing-region anticipation task under visual-only and auditory-only conditions. Behavioral performance was analyzed using mixed analyses of variance (ANOVAs), and accuracy and reaction time were jointly modeled with HDDM parameters: boundary separation (a), drift rate (v), non-decision time (t), and starting-point bias (z). Experts showed higher overall accuracy than novices, F(1, 64) = 56.46, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.469, whereas reaction time did not differ significantly by group. The auditory-only condition produced higher accuracy, F(1, 64) = 12.69, p = 0.001, ηp2 = 0.165, but longer reaction times, F(1, 64) = 150.32, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.701. HDDM results showed higher drift rates in experts under both visual-only (BF10 = 1992.845) and auditory-only (BF10 = 24.354) conditions; auditory-only anticipation also involved higher boundary separation (BF10 = 53.095). These findings suggest that badminton expertise is associated with higher anticipatory accuracy and more efficient evidence accumulation under unimodal cue conditions, while auditory-only anticipation may also involve a more cautious decision threshold.