What the Research Supports — and What It Does Not Yet Prove
NDVPerformance uses research to guide how the program is structured, but we separate evidence for trained-task improvement from claims about game performance. That distinction is important for athletes, parents and coaches.
What research supports
- Visual and visual-cognitive skills can be measured on specific tasks.
- Athletes can improve performance on trained visual, perceptual and visual-motor tasks.
- Expert athletes often differ from less-skilled athletes in cue detection, visual search, attention, processing speed and other perceptual skills.
- Sport transfer is more credible when the training includes representative sport-specific information and actions.
What FAME does not claim
- A chart drill guarantees a better batting average.
- An improvement on a home-training drill automatically equals better game performance.
- The FAME Starting Profile is a clinical diagnosis or medical test.
- The program replaces baseball coaching, comprehensive eye care, medical care or rehabilitation.
- Generic visual or cognitive training should be assumed to transfer to all sports outcomes.
Recommended Resources
- Lochhead, Feng, Laby & Appelbaum (2024), systematic review of sports vision training literature.
- Fransen (2024), opinion on limitations of far-transfer claims from generic perceptual/cognitive training to sports performance.
- Appelbaum & Erickson (2016), review of sports vision training and digital techniques.
- Mann & Gorman (2005), discussion of general versus sport-specific visual training and perceptual skill development.
