Further evidence against eye–hand coordination as a general ability

A number of companies are marketing general eye–hand coordination training devices, which are purported to enhance performance on the device and in a sporting domain. An act comprising eye–hand coordination involves the complex combination of a number of distinct functions, and an investigation of what tasks share this common factor has not been completed. There is also a lack of evidence investigating the interrelationship between different tests to assess eye–hand coordination using these devices. A number of different eye–hand coordination abilities, rather than one common factor, could potentially underpin any range of tasks involving eye–hand coordination and visual stimuli. Therefore, the present study investigated the theoretical assumption upon which such eye–hand coordination training devices are based, that is, whether eye–hand coordination is a general ability. Eighty-seven currently active sportspeople (age: 18.6？±？0.9 years; 58 males and 29 females) completed four tests of eye–hand coordination: three laboratory tasks (the Sports Vision Trainer？; Batak Pro？; and Graded Pegboard) and a field task (wall catch test). Intercorrelations between the tasks ranged from weak to strong, but the percentage of shared variance was typically low. Overall, the results do not support the existence of a common eye–hand coordination ability underpinning the performance on general eye–hand coordination training devices. Consequently, coaches and sport scientists should be aware that training on general eye–hand coordination training devices is unlikely to transfer to sporting performances. Instead, practitioners are encouraged to explore sport-specific assessment and training of eye–hand coordination