Explaining “What for” in Motion Analysis Research: A Proposal for a Counterfactual Framework That Is Slightly Different From the Theory of Causation

In motion analysis research, the methodology for estimating the physical processes of human movement is highly developed, but the methodology for interpreting such data is relatively undeveloped. One of the aims of this paper is to demonstrate the importance of developing a conceptual basis for inte...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Leon Omura, Senshi Fukashiro, Shinsuke Yoshioka
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:	biomechanics motion analysis fitness for purpose teleological thinking movement technique Sports GV557-1198.995
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/36feb428c0ad458aa852e3ef8ac02f3d
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:36feb428c0ad458aa852e3ef8ac02f3d
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:36feb428c0ad458aa852e3ef8ac02f3d2021-11-10T06:44:30ZExplaining “What for” in Motion Analysis Research: A Proposal for a Counterfactual Framework That Is Slightly Different From the Theory of Causation2624-936710.3389/fspor.2021.699322https://doaj.org/article/36feb428c0ad458aa852e3ef8ac02f3d2021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspor.2021.699322/fullhttps://doaj.org/toc/2624-9367In motion analysis research, the methodology for estimating the physical processes of human movement is highly developed, but the methodology for interpreting such data is relatively undeveloped. One of the aims of this paper is to demonstrate the importance of developing a conceptual basis for interpreting data about the physical processes of body movement. In this conceptual study, one topic was discussed as a central question: what it means to answer the question what a certain movement technique is aimed for. We first introduced the distinction between explanations from the perspective of causes and explanations from the perspective of purposes as a mode of explaining events, and pointed out the importance of explanations from the perspective of purposes. We next argued that by taking the perspective of whether a given movement technique leads to a desired outcome in comparison to other movement techniques, we can expect to interpret what a given movement technique is for based on objectively observable information rather than the subjective intentions of the athlete. In addition, we discussed how the criterion movement patterns should be defined when assessing the fitness for purpose of a given movement technique in terms of its consequences. In this regard, our argument is that it is necessary to take into account that the exact same movement pattern cannot be performed every time, even for the same motor task, and that there are multiple options for how to define the set of possible movement patterns that can be performed. Our discussion reveals the peculiarity of grasping the meaning of movement techniques, and therefore suggests that there is a substantial need for motion analysis researchers to deepen their conceptual analysis to understand the nature of this issue.Leon OmuraLeon OmuraSenshi FukashiroShinsuke YoshiokaFrontiers Media S.A.articlebiomechanicsmotion analysisfitness for purposeteleological thinkingmovement techniqueSportsGV557-1198.995ENFrontiers in Sports and Active Living, Vol 3 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	biomechanics motion analysis fitness for purpose teleological thinking movement technique Sports GV557-1198.995
spellingShingle	biomechanics motion analysis fitness for purpose teleological thinking movement technique Sports GV557-1198.995 Leon Omura Leon Omura Senshi Fukashiro Shinsuke Yoshioka Explaining “What for” in Motion Analysis Research: A Proposal for a Counterfactual Framework That Is Slightly Different From the Theory of Causation
description	In motion analysis research, the methodology for estimating the physical processes of human movement is highly developed, but the methodology for interpreting such data is relatively undeveloped. One of the aims of this paper is to demonstrate the importance of developing a conceptual basis for interpreting data about the physical processes of body movement. In this conceptual study, one topic was discussed as a central question: what it means to answer the question what a certain movement technique is aimed for. We first introduced the distinction between explanations from the perspective of causes and explanations from the perspective of purposes as a mode of explaining events, and pointed out the importance of explanations from the perspective of purposes. We next argued that by taking the perspective of whether a given movement technique leads to a desired outcome in comparison to other movement techniques, we can expect to interpret what a given movement technique is for based on objectively observable information rather than the subjective intentions of the athlete. In addition, we discussed how the criterion movement patterns should be defined when assessing the fitness for purpose of a given movement technique in terms of its consequences. In this regard, our argument is that it is necessary to take into account that the exact same movement pattern cannot be performed every time, even for the same motor task, and that there are multiple options for how to define the set of possible movement patterns that can be performed. Our discussion reveals the peculiarity of grasping the meaning of movement techniques, and therefore suggests that there is a substantial need for motion analysis researchers to deepen their conceptual analysis to understand the nature of this issue.
format	article
author	Leon Omura Leon Omura Senshi Fukashiro Shinsuke Yoshioka
author_facet	Leon Omura Leon Omura Senshi Fukashiro Shinsuke Yoshioka
author_sort	Leon Omura
title	Explaining “What for” in Motion Analysis Research: A Proposal for a Counterfactual Framework That Is Slightly Different From the Theory of Causation
title_short	Explaining “What for” in Motion Analysis Research: A Proposal for a Counterfactual Framework That Is Slightly Different From the Theory of Causation
title_full	Explaining “What for” in Motion Analysis Research: A Proposal for a Counterfactual Framework That Is Slightly Different From the Theory of Causation
title_fullStr	Explaining “What for” in Motion Analysis Research: A Proposal for a Counterfactual Framework That Is Slightly Different From the Theory of Causation
title_full_unstemmed	Explaining “What for” in Motion Analysis Research: A Proposal for a Counterfactual Framework That Is Slightly Different From the Theory of Causation
title_sort	explaining “what for” in motion analysis research: a proposal for a counterfactual framework that is slightly different from the theory of causation
publisher	Frontiers Media S.A.
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/36feb428c0ad458aa852e3ef8ac02f3d
work_keys_str_mv	AT leonomura explainingwhatforinmotionanalysisresearchaproposalforacounterfactualframeworkthatisslightlydifferentfromthetheoryofcausation AT leonomura explainingwhatforinmotionanalysisresearchaproposalforacounterfactualframeworkthatisslightlydifferentfromthetheoryofcausation AT senshifukashiro explainingwhatforinmotionanalysisresearchaproposalforacounterfactualframeworkthatisslightlydifferentfromthetheoryofcausation AT shinsukeyoshioka explainingwhatforinmotionanalysisresearchaproposalforacounterfactualframeworkthatisslightlydifferentfromthetheoryofcausation
_version_	1718440457387638784

Explaining “What for” in Motion Analysis Research: A Proposal for a Counterfactual Framework That Is Slightly Different From the Theory of Causation

Ejemplares similares