The effectiveness of decision-making training in team-sport officials: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This content is included in your SPKN Membership

Study Details

Authors
Aden Kittel, Riki Lindsay, Paul Larkin, Michael Spittle, & Ian Cunningham
Published
2025
View the study
Citation
Kittel, A., Lindsay, R., Larkin, P., Spittle, M., & Cunningham, I. (2025). The effectiveness of decision-making training in team-sport officials: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 79, 102841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2025.102841

Sports officials must make accurate, fast, and fair decisions under pressure—skills that are challenging to develop given the lack of structured training environments. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized findings from 14 studies (9 included in the meta-analysis) to evaluate the effectiveness of decision-making training programs for team-sport officials across different sports, tools, durations, and performance outcomes. Results highlight the need to better tailor training to decision types, sport contexts, and stages of expertise.

Decision-Making Training Improves Performance, Especially for Objective Decisions

  • Structured training programs improved decision accuracy compared to no training.
  • Gains were especially strong for objective decisions (e.g., offsides, line calls), where rules are clearly defined and less open to interpretation.
  • Improvements were more modest for subjective calls (e.g., fouls), which require more situational judgment.

Video-Based Training Is Effective and Practical

  • Most training programs used 2-D video clips, which proved useful for improving accuracy in simulated environments.
  • Short-term training (4–6 weeks) delivered noticeable benefits, suggesting that effective interventions don’t need to be lengthy.
  • Weekly practice sessions appeared to be a manageable and productive frequency.

Training Is More Effective in Some Sports Than Others

  • The clearest benefits were found in soccer and rugby, where rule enforcement tends to involve more clear-cut decisions.
  • Australian football officials saw less improvement, possibly due to the more interpretive nature of common infractions.

Officials at Intermediate Levels Benefit the Most

  • Sub-elite officials showed the most improvement, suggesting they are at a developmental stage where structured support makes a meaningful difference.
  • Training effects were less consistent for amateur officials, and too little data were available for conclusions about elite-level referees.

Emerging Tools Like VR Show Promise

  • Some studies explored immersive tools like virtual reality, which may help with complex, context-rich decisions.
  • More research is needed to understand how these tools translate to real-world officiating performance.

Implications for Coaches, Trainers, and Sport Organizations

  • Structured decision-making training should be integrated into referee development pathways, especially for rising officials.
  • Objective scenarios are ideal for video-based practice, while subjective decisions may benefit from VR or multi-layered scenario training.
  • Programs should be tailored by sport and referee level, and designed to avoid training fatigue or overload.

Future Research Needs

  • Broader representation of sports and officiating levels in training studies.
  • Better integration of real-world stressors and game context in training simulations.

Long-term follow-up to assess on-field transfer and retention of training benefits.