Claim page revised, version 2

Mon, 11 May 2026 08:00:00 GMT

There is a single study, and it comes from a journal with questionable editorial standards. Sixty Indonesian archers under 18, split into two groups of thirty, took a 40-metre test before and after fourteen sessions, between February and April 2022: one group filmed itself at every practice and reviewed the footage with the instructor, the other trained as usual. In the video group the test score rises from 18.30 to 22.53, in the control group it stays put (from 19.10 to 19.37, p = 0.133), and at the end about three points separate the two groups (3.17, p < 0.001). The limits are many. The paper does not say how the groups were formed and its method section describes a single-group design; the abstract counts sixteen meetings, seven on the field, seven online and two for testing; the confidence interval for the experimental group has its signs reversed relative to the difference; and it is unclear how many arrows the score is based on. Above all there is no group receiving the same attention from the instructor without the video, so nobody can tell whether the filming or the time spent reviewing the shot made the difference. By rule a questionable venue does not decide the status: the registry reports the study, but the status remains not studied.

"Recording yourself on video during practice raises your score" added to the registry as Not studied

Fri, 03 Apr 2026 08:00:00 GMT

Recording yourself on video during practice raises your score · What changed

Claim page revised, version 2

"Recording yourself on video during practice raises your score" added to the registry as Not studied