Contributions to Sport Psychology: Walter R. Miles and the Early Studies on the Motor Skills of Athletes 1

Abstract

During the late 1890s and early 1900s, psychologists began to study the motor skills of athletes. One individual who gained attention for his work related to investigating the motor skills of athletes was Walter R. Miles. In particular, his research related to the reaction time of football players at Stanford University gained notoriety. Although these studies have been overviewed, discussion of Miles's additional work and influence related the study of athletes has received virtually no attention. This paper examines the various contributions of Miles and his colleagues to the study of the perceptual and motor skills of athletes.

Walter R. Miles was born on March 29, 1885 in the Territory of Dakota (Hilgard, 1980). In 1901, his education commenced in the preparatory department of Pacific College (Miles, 1967). During the time that he attended preparatory school, Miles participated in football (Miles, 1967). After completion of preparatory school, Miles studied at Pacific College where he was also the president of the YMCA student group (“College Orators will Meet in Interstate Prohibition Contest,” 1904). Miles completed his bachelor's degree from Earlham College and obtained his doctoral degree in 1913 from the University of Iowa where he studied psychology under Carl E. Seashore (Hilgard, 1980).

According to Miles (1956), C. E. Seashore was interested in using psychological measurements to identify talented musicians. Seashore believed that an assessment of tone could be measured and those that did not score well did not have the innate ability to be a top musical performer (Miles, 1956). Seashore also believed that there were factors that could be identified in athletics that could be identified and measured. It seems probable that Miles was influenced to study athletes based on the work of C. E. Seashore, his mentor. Seashore's students and colleagues would begin to study the factors that influenced athletic ability and performance (e.g., Gilbert, 1924; Alexander, 1929; Murphy, 1930; Table 1). Thus, similar to Seashore's studies of utilizing testing to identify those that had potential to be successful musicians, Miles (1931a, 1931b) examined the reaction time of football players to determine if this skill could predict who was a successful athlete (Davis, 1928). In fact, Miles published four articles related to the reaction time of football players (Miles, 1928a, 1928b, 1931b; Miles & Graves, 1931). Additionally, Miles also referred to studies that had been completed on the motor skills of athletes in his 1932 APA presidential address (Miles, 1933a).

TABLE 1

Highlights of the Study of the Motor Abilities and Peak Performance of Athletes in the Early Years of Sport Psychology

Year	Event
1893	Scripture, along with George Ladd and physical educator George W. Anderson, completes a study of the reaction time of fencers in the Yale Psychology Laboratory
1899	C. E. Seashore reviews Norman Triplett's work on competition and cycling
1920	Albert Johanson and Joseph Holmes study the motor abilities of Babe Ruth in the Columbia Psychology Laboratory
1923	Roy Dorcus completes studies of athletes on a series of motor coordination tests in the psychological laboratory at John Hopkins University
1924	Alva Gilbert writes his master's thesis, “Some Aspects of the Psychology of Tennis,” on a comparison of expert and non-expert tennis players' decision making skills under the direction of F. B. Knight in the Department of Philosophy and Psychology at the University of Iowa
1925	Coleman Griffith begins directing a laboratory for research in athletics in which a main area of research focus is to assess athletic talent and abilities
1926	B. C. Graves and Walter Miles conduct reaction time study with football players from the Stanford University football team
1927	Miles conducts the second reaction time study with Stanford Football Team in Collaboration with coach Glen “Pop” Warner
1927	Robert H. Seashore, a post-doctoral researcher studying under Miles's supervision, develops the Stanford Motor Skills Unit and presents research testing athletes on this unit at the 1927 APA Convention
1928	Miles publishes How Fast Can You Get Away, which describes the development of a machine to measure the reaction time of football players
1928	Miles presents his research on the reaction time of football players at the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology conference in Ann Arbor, Michigan
1929	Joe Alexander writes his thesis “Techniques for the Study of Motor Skills” at the University of Iowa under the supervision of psychology professor Milton Metfessel
1930	Paul G. Murphy, using the Stanford Motor Skills Unit completes a thesis titled, “The Utilization of the Stanford Motor Skills Unit in the Field of Athletics” under the supervision of Carl E. Seashore at the University of Iowa
1930	Lovic P. Herrington completes a dissertation on “The Physiological Psychology of Introverts and Extroverts” under Miles's supervision
1931	Miles publishes two studies on the reaction time of football players at Stanford University in the Research Quarterly for Health and Physical Education
1932	As part of the Stanford Later Maturity Studies under the supervision of Miles, Albert Walton completes the dissertation “The Effect of Age on Motor Abilities in Athletes”
1932	Richard W. Husband presents “Comparative Motor Abilities of Athletes and Non-athletes” at the 1932 American Psychological Association Meeting
1932	M. Steen utilizes the Stanford Motor Skills Unit to test athletes under the supervision of R.W. Husband and writes the bachelor's thesis, “Individual Differences of Motor Ability Between the Athlete and the Non-Athlete”
1933	J. F. Poser investigates the motor abilities of athletes using the Stanford Motor Skills Unit to test athletes under the supervision of R.W. Husband and writes the bachelor's thesis, “Comparisons of Motor Reactions of the Athlete and the Non-Athlete”
1934	Miles begins consulting with Edward Pugsley on the reaction time of trapshooters and other questions related to motor skills and rifle shooting
1934	R. W. Husband presents a book chapter review of the psychology of athletics in his text, Applied Psychology
1935	Miles publishes data on the reaction time of trapshooters in his article, “Training, Practice, and Mental Longevity” in the journal Science
1934	Miles describes age and performance in sports skills research in his chapter “Age and Human Society” in the Handbook of Social Psychology
1934	R. W. Husband publishes an article on the precompetitive emotions of athletes in the Journal of Genetic Psychology
1935	Paul Buttenwieser writes his dissertation titled, “Age and Skill in Expert Chess Players”
1936	At the Yale University Institute of Human Relations under the supervision of Walter R. Miles and Catherine C. Miles, Irvin C. Child conducted a study titled, “The Relation Between Athletic Participation and Psychological Measures: Report of an Exploratory Study”
1942	Harold G. Seashore publishes “Some Relationships of Fine and Gross Motor Abilities” in the Research Quarterly
1949	Richard W. Husband publishes a chapter on the psychology of athletics in the 2nd edition of his text Applied Psychology

Although Miles acknowledged the study of the motor skills of athletes in his autobiography (Miles, 1967), and other writings (Miles, 1935a, 1963), perhaps more would have been known about the findings from these studies if the proposed text highlighting these investigations would have been published. This paper provides details of Miles's contributions and interest in the study of the motor skills of athletes. Furthermore, this manuscript recounts how Miles and Miles's students and colleagues studied the motor abilities of athletes in the 1920s and 1930s to determine if there were various psychomotor factors that could possibly predict success in athletics.

Studying the Motor Skills of Athletes

Stanford Later Maturity Studies

One of Miles's most well-known projects was the Stanford Later Maturity Studies, which investigated the development of individuals in later life (Baugh & Benjamin, 2006). As a component of these studies, Miles planned an investigation to examine the motor abilities of athletes (Walton, 1932). Miles recruited Albert Walton who wrote his dissertation, “The Effect of Age on Motor Abilities in Athletes,” under Miles's supervision as part of the Stanford Later Maturity Studies (Walton, 1932; Miles, 1967). Unfortunately this volume of the Studies was not published.

Miles's desire to include the investigation of the motor skills of athletes as part of the Stanford Later Maturity Studies seems consistent with his interests. For instance, he had already examined the reaction time of football players (e.g., Miles, 1931b; Miles & Graves, 1931) and most certainly was interested in peak performance as he was a former football player, a champion debater and a coach for the University of Iowa debate team (“Iowa Man Gets Fine Position,” 1913; Miles, 1967). In a comparable manner to Miles, Walton had similar sporting interests (Walton, 1929). Miles awareness of Walton's interest and frequent participation in the sports of handball and running (Walton, 1929) may have been the reason Miles chose Walton to complete research on the motor abilities of athletes.

Investigating the Maintenance of Athletic Ability in Older Athletes

Although Miles initially planned the study of athletes for the Stanford Later Maturity project, Calvin P. Stone and Edward K. Strong supervised Walton's work while Miles was at Yale University for the 1930–1931 academic year (Stone, 1931). During this time period, Stone kept Miles abreast of Walton's progress (Stone, 1931). Specifically, in correspondence with Miles, Stone expressed intrigue with the trapshooting data Walton accumulated. Additionally, Stone encouraged Miles to acquire marksmanship records from the United States Military (Stone, 1931). Stone believed obtaining this type of data would be beneficial since this information would allow for the documentation of the maintenance of physical skill over a long period. Emphatically, Stone (1931) stated: “If data of this character can be brought into psychology by our Later Maturity Study, we would probably render a greater service than can be rendered by an expenditure of $500 to $1000 in an experimental program.”

It is obvious that the interaction between Miles and Stone was influential in Miles's interest and enthusiasm in aiding Walton with his data collection efforts. This collaborative spirit was consistent with how leaders within the Stanford Psychology Department viewed themselves and was also utilized as a selling point when applying for funding for the Stanford Later Maturity project. Specifically, in the grant application that Terman and Miles (1928a, 1928b) wrote, they stated, “There is exceptionally fine cooperative spirit within the Stanford psychology faculty and between the psychology faculty groups in related fields” (pp. 10–11). Additionally, Miles was very appreciative of Stone's help with student's during his absence during the 1930–1931 academic year. In fact, Miles wrote, “I am indebted also to my Stanford colleagues, Professors Lewis M. Terman and Calvin P. Stone for valuable suggestions and guidance of some of the younger investigators especially during my absence from Stanford in the academic year 1930–31” (Miles, 1933a, p. 112).

Miles, inspired by Stone's recommendation, sent numerous letters in an attempt to procure records of marksmanship performance (e.g., Miles, 1932a, 1932b, 1932c, 1932d, 1932e). An illustration of Miles's interest in obtaining this information is demonstrated in the following letter sent to the Rod and Gun Company (Miles, 1932d): “We are working experimentally on the problem of later maturity and the changes that occur throughout the lifespan. I am anxious to take account of those practical skills which are revealed in sports and probably marksmanship is one of the best. I will appreciate any assistance you can give.”

One individual who responded to Miles's request was Ernest H. Robinson, the editor for the N. R. A. Journal and Shooting News. He supported Miles's belief that rifle shooters can maintain motor skill ability into their later years. Additionally, Robinson provided rifle shooting records related to age and peak performance (Robinson, 1932). These records were utilized by Walton to complete a case study on an expert rifle shooter's performance over three decades (Walton, 1932). He discovered that the rifle shooter was able to sustain a high level of competitive shooting performance for over 27 years and that expertise in performing this skill continued past the age of 50 years (Walton, 1932).

Miles's role in the collection of data is typical of the close relationships that Miles had with his graduate students. In fact, Hilgard (1980) pointed out that the ability to work closely with students was a main reason that Miles left the Carnegie Nutrition Laboratory and became a member of the psychology faculty at Stanford University. It seems apparent that Miles believed that his role was to assist in the research process and that he enjoyed mentoring his graduate students (Miles, 1967). Additionally, it was not uncommon for Miles to be involved in research and data collection with his students. For instance, Miles had a keen interest in the development of unique experimental apparatus in order to collect data for research ideas. For example, Miles developed an apparatus to measure the reaction time of football players that was utilized for Graves' (1927) Master's thesis.

Another example of data utilized by Walton to analyze the maintenance of athletic skill was the records of over 10,000 individual trapshooters (Walton, 1932). From this voluminous data, Walton specifically chose to analyze the records of 40 trapshooting experts over the age of 50 who performed at a high level for many years. Walton was proud of collecting this data and believed that the analyses of these records would make an important contribution. Specifically, Walton (1932) stated: “This record probably constitutes one of the most remarkable compilations of data yet gathered on the subject of motor coordination of men and women who have passed the half century mark” (p. 52).

The main findings from the analysis of the shooting records of the 40 older expert trapshooters supported a general conclusion from the Stanford Later Maturity Studies. In particular, Walton found that although an individual's cognitive and motor function may decrease progressively as one matures, trapshooting performance could be sustained at a high level for a long period of time (Walton, 1932; Miller, 1980). This finding led Walton, (1940a, 1940b) to conclude: “The data obtained indicate conclusively that skills in this sort of motor coordination can be maintained at exceptionally high levels well beyond the half-century mark” (p. 38). Walton's research may have been one of the first studies to demonstrate the maintenance of athletic expertise as one ages. In fact, Miles (1935a) emphasized this significant finding when he stated: “Although Walton's study is not exhaustive, it has proved very revealing with respect to ability in older people. Trapshooting is probably not the only game of high skill in which men and women can continue to hit the mark during later maturity” (pp. 655–656).

More recent reviews of research on age and peak performance have been consistent with these original findings and conclusions. For instance, Ericsson and Charness (1994) noted that the study of expert performers has provided an understanding of the maintenance of expertise throughout the lifespan. Specifically, Ericsson's (1990) conclusions are similar to the findings of Walton (1932) and the suggestions made by Miles (1935a). Specifically, Ericsson (1990) concluded that: “The emergence of master's athletes who regularly practice at older ages has clearly demonstrated that peak performances at older ages was vastly underestimated and the decrements in performance with increasing age can be dramatically reduced with continued practice” (p. 182).

Examination of Age and Peak Performance in Sport and Games

Another area of performance in sport and games investigated as part of the Stanford Later Maturity Studies was an analysis of the age at which peak performance occurred (e.g., Walton, 1932; Buttenwieser, 1935). For example, Walton (1932) analyzed the records of three rifle shooting championships and found that the ages of most prize winners were between 35 and 45 years. Additionally, Buttenwieser (1935) expanded the understanding of peak performance in sport and games through his dissertation, “Age and Skill in Expert Chess Players,” which was also part of the Stanford Later Maturity Studies (Miles, 1963; Miles, 1967). In particular, Buttenwieser analyzed records of chess performance to determine at what age chess masters attain peak levels of performance, and how long peak chess performance was maintained. Analyzing data from 191 tournament records of chess masters from 1862 to 1933, Buttenwieser discovered that chess masters reached their peak ability between the ages of 30 and 39 years; however, they only declined slightly in ability between 40 and 49 years. Interestingly, Buttenwieser's data revealed that about 15% of the chess masters improved skill level between 50 and 59 years. However, the skill of most expert chess players declined during their 50's and 60's.

Subsequent to the studies that examined the age of an athlete's best performance as part of the Stanford Later Maturity Studies (e.g., Walton, 1932; Buttenwieser, 1935), Harvey Lehman, a professor of psychology at Ohio University, presented a paper on peak performance and age in the sports of rifle and pistol shooting at the 1937 Annual APA meeting (Lehman, 1937; Table 1). Additionally, Lehman (1938) also published a study on the age of peak performance in games and sports in the Research Quarterly. This published study examined the ages that individuals obtained peak performance in rifle and pistol shooting as well as many other sports.

It is interesting to note the details of the work of Harvey Lehman, who advanced this research on peak performance in sports. Although Lehman does not cite the work of Walton and Buttenweiser in his 1938 publication, it is certainly plausible that Lehman knew of Walton and Buttenweiser's work, as the research was similar. The similarities included gathering records of the ages of when championships were won. Lehman also analyzed the ages of athletes when they broke a record. In order to collect the data, Lehman used a book titled, All Sports Record Book by Frank G. Menke. Lehman (1938) recorded data which included the names of the champions and world record holders and the ages of the individuals when they became champions. For each of the eleven sports analyzed, the average age of the champion and record holder and what the peak years for success were in each sport was assessed. Lehman found that athletes in the sports of baseball, boxing, tennis, and racing achieved peak performance at an earlier age than athletes in the sports of rifle shooting, pistol shooting, corn husking, bowling, duck-pin bowling, golf, and billiards.

The findings from the Lehman (1938), Walton (1932) and Buttenwieser (1935) studies appear consistent with more recent literature reviews on age and peak performance. In particular, Ericsson and Charness (1994) based on their review of the research suggested that peak performance seems to occur between the 20s to the 40s depending on the type of sport.

Continued Research on the Motor Skills of Athletes: A Study of Trapshooters

Miles continued his involvement on the study of the maintenance of athletic performance in one's later years during the early 1930s. Specifically, a collaborative project was begun with Edwin Pugsley, a former Yale trapshooting team captain and Vice President of the Winchester Repeating Arms Company. Miles's association with Pugsley occurred because of Pugsley's desire to obtain assistance in analyzing reaction time data that had been collected at the 1932 national trapshooting championships (Pugsley, 1934).

The historical record is not clear on how Pugsley and Miles became acquainted. One plausible explanation is that since Miles sent many letters to organizations requesting trapshooting and marksmanship data, someone within one of those organizations informed Pugsley of Miles's work. A second hypothesis that seems reasonable is that because Pugsley was a Yale alumnus and residing in New Haven, Connecticut, he contacted the psychology department at Yale University and therefore learned of Miles's work. Regardless, Miles more than likely had various motives for collaborating with Pugsley. First, he was undoubtedly interested in completing a follow up study based on the conclusions of Walton's (1932) research. Secondly, the study with Pugsley combined two main elements of previous research that Miles had completed. Miles's study of football charging analyzed the relationship of reaction time to successful football performance, while Walton's dissertation research focused on the maintenance of skill and the age of peak performance. Pugsley's 1932 trapshooting data combined these main elements of Miles's previous studies.

Subsequent to accepting Pugsley's request, Miles acquired the trapshooting reaction time data (Miles, ca. 1934, 1935b). The data were analyzed in a comparable manner to a previous Stanford Later Maturity study (e.g., Miles, 1931a). Specifically, Miles divided the trapshooting data into eight specific age ranges and computed an average reaction time for each age group. He also classified the ranking of the trapshooters to determine if there was a relationship between level of trapshooting and reaction time. After analyzing the data, Miles concluded that those at a higher level of trapshooting had quicker reaction times than those at lower levels. Additionally, Miles discovered that reaction time decreased slightly for the older athletes (Miles, ca. 1934).

The design utilized in the study of rifle shooting and reaction time was a cross-sectional design to determine differences in the reaction time of individuals of different ages and of different skill levels. Such designs, as used in various of the Stanford Later Maturity Studies, have been critiqued in more recent literature (Goodwin, 2003). For example, the methodology utilized in the studies to analyze age effects on trapshooting ability measure trapshooters' reaction time on only one occasion. The main reason for utilizing this type of design was practicality; therefore it has been the most common type of design for comparing various ages on various abilities (Cavanaugh & Blanchard-Fields, 2014). Although Cavanaugh and Blanchard-Fields (2014) suggested that cross-sectional design is common, there are some key related weaknesses. First, individuals are only assessed at one point in time and thus it is not known how a particular skill changes over time (Cavanaugh & Blanchard-Fields, 2014). Secondly, differences between groups in a cross-sectional design could stem from environmental effects rather than from the process of aging.

Although in retrospect there have may have been methodological issues with the studies that Miles analyzed on the relationship of reaction time and rifle shooting, these results were published in the journal Science (Miles, 1935b) and also presented at the American Association for the Advancement of Science Meeting. During this presentation, Miles explained that although an individual's mental ability can decrease significantly as one ages, a motor skill can remain at a high level of expertise if one continues to practice that skill (“Psychologist Tells How to Prolong Mental Life,” 1935).

Studies on the Motor Abilities of Athletes

The curiosity Pugsley demonstrated in examining the reaction times of athletes was comparable to the interest physical educators, coaches, and society had with regard to the field of psychology during the early 1900s. For instance, during the beginning of the twentieth century many coaches and athletic personnel believed that athletes were born with particular abilities that provided them possibilities for athletic success. The following statement by coach Eugene Nixon exemplifies this attitude: “If you wish to know whether you may ever become an athlete, go to the nearest psychological laboratory and ask the man to test your reaction time and to tell you whether it is short or long.” (Nixon, 1919, p. III-1).

Perhaps Hugh Fullerton had read Nixon's article when he arranged for Babe Ruth's perceptual and motor abilities to be tested at the Columbia University Psychological Laboratory by psychologists Albert Johanson and Joseph Holmes (Fuchs, 1998). After testing Ruth, they concluded that his vision, hearing, motor coordination, attention, perception, and intelligence were well beyond the mean of the general population (Fullerton, 1921). However, not only did Holmes and Johanson examine Babe Ruth's perceptual and motor skills, they also studied boxer Harry Wills (Holmes, 1922) and the golfer Walter Hagen (“A Duel Between Champions,” 1925). Comparable to the investigations of Ruth's abilities, Wills and Hagen were also tested on various perceptual and motor skill assessments. Holmes and Johanson also concluded that Wills and Hagen had perceptual and motor abilities that were much better than those of the general population (Holmes, 1922; “A Duel Between Champions,” 1925).

Thus, sports professionals and psychologists were developing interest in how psychological measurements of perceptual and motor skill ability could aid in understanding an athlete's potential talent (Angle, 1975). Coleman Griffith recognized this topic as an important part of the work of the Laboratory for Research in Athletics at the University of Illinois. In particular, Griffith (1930) noted that, “a third task of the laboratory has been to make a survey of what has been called athletic aptitude or athletic talent” (p. 38). At approximately the same time as Griffith, Miles, with his students and colleagues, was also beginning to study the perceptual and motor abilities of athletes (Table 1). For instance, Miles (1931b) was interested in determining if the measurement of a football player's reaction time could predict their athletic skill. His interest in measuring the reaction time of football players was related to whether or not a mechanical measurement device could assist coaches in selecting the best athletes. Miles (1931b) discovered that a measure of reaction time was related to successful football performance. Additionally, in support of these findings, Miles (ca. 1934) found that successful trapshooters had faster reaction times. Specifically, Miles (ca. 1934) stated, “…it is very interesting to discover the reaction time results at almost every point agree with what would be expected in terms of the trapshooters' classification rank” (p. 7).

Miles's students and colleagues were also interested in studying the motor abilities of athletes.² For instance, Richard W. Husband and Robert H. Seashore were curious about whether athletes had particular perceptual and motor skill aptitudes that would forecast success in athletics. Miles's influence on their work conducted in athletics is observable in the various investigations that R. H. Seashore, Husband, and their students completed within the athletic realm.

Robert H. Seashore and Studies of the Motor Abilities of Athletes

R. H. Seashore completed a postdoctoral fellowship under Miles's supervision at Stanford University between 1926 and 1928 (Hilgard, 1980). While completing this training, R. H. Seashore and Miles collaborated to develop the Stanford Motor Skills Unit (Hilgard, 1980). This apparatus included six tests (Seashore, 1928). The purpose of the six tests was to analyze one's ability on these tests in order to determine if there was a correlation on these tests to work completed in a practical setting. According to Seashore, these tests took approximately two hours to complete and the participant completing the test was instructed to concentrate on completing the test as if he was involved as an athlete in an athletic competition. The six tests included the Brown Spool Packer, Koerth pursuit rotor, the Miles Speed drill, Motor Rhythm, Serial Discrimeter, and the Tapping Key tests (Seashore, 1928). The Brown Spool Packer test measured speed and accuracy. The participant was to pick up a spool as quickly as they could and place the spool in a box. This test lasted 2 min. The Koerth pursuit rotor was a measure of eye-hand coordination in which a target moved in a circular pattern at varying speeds and the participant had to keep a pointer on the target. Another test included in this unit was the Miles Motility Rotor, in which speed in turning a hand drill was measured. The other tests in the Stanford Motor Skills Unit included the Motor Rhythm Discrimeter. In this test, the participant would listen to various sounds and have to tap a telegraph key in the same rhythm as the sound he was hearing. The serial descrimeter test was developed to assess quickness in choosing the correct signal. The participant was shown one of four signals and then had to press the corresponding key that matched the stimulus. A sixth test was the Tapping Test, in which the participant tapped a telegraph key as quickly as possible (Seashore, 1928).

Although the apparatus was devised to evaluate the motor skills of those involved in business and industry, testing of athletes' motor skills was also accomplished with this test battery. For instance, R. H. Seashore (1928) reported a positive correlation between scores on these instruments and athletic ability. Furthermore, R. H. Seashore (1930) discovered that top athletes scored high on tests related to pursuit and also above average on other measures.

While a professor at the University of Oregon, R. H. Seashore also conducted investigations related to the motor abilities of athletes. Specifically, R. H. Seashore and graduate student Raymond Adams examined the steadiness of athletes on the university rifle team (Seashore & Adams, 1933). They found that these athletes scored significantly higher on a test of steadiness than non-athletes. This result led them to hypothesize that those that are more successful at this skill are either born with a steadiness aptitude or long hours of practice helps rifle shooters develop their steadiness to a high level (Seashore & Adams, 1933).

In a similar manner to how Miles's (1931b) study was highlighted in media reports, Seashore and Adams's work also received attention.³ For example, two reports showcasing their work were titled, “Steadiness Tests May Pick Marksmen Before They Shoot” (1934), and “Good Shots are Born, Not Made, Psychologists Find” (Blakeslee, 1934). Blakeslee (1934) reported that although their findings seemed to indicate the possibility of innate differences between the rifle shooters and non-athletes, R. H. Seashore and Adams were interested in testing this hypothesis by conducting research using an experimental design. They proposed having a group of non-athletes without previous rifle shooting experience complete a series of perceptual and motor tests. After assigning individuals to groups based on their initial scores on the steadiness tests, they hoped to discover if long-term practice influenced rifle shooting performance. Specifically, they were interested in determining if a group with higher initial steadiness scores would also perform significantly better with practice in rifle shooting than the group that did not initially score high on this construct (Blakeslee, 1934). Unfortunately, it does not appear that these tests were completed.

Richard W. Husband's Studies of the Motor Abilities of Athletes

Similar to R. H. Seashore, Richard W. Husband also worked with Miles at Stanford University and was interested in testing the motor abilities of athletes.⁴ For instance, as a student of Miles's at Stanford University, Husband noted in his dissertation research that he had tested six football players (Husband, 1929). After completing his doctoral work, Husband became a professor of psychology at the University of Wisconsin, where he also continued to utilize athletes in his research. For example, Husband with the assistance of Steen (1932, as cited in Husband, 1934), and Poser (1933, as cited in Husband, 1934) investigated the perceptual and motor abilities of varsity athletes. In a similar manner to Seashore (1928) and Miles (1931b), Husband was interested in determining if certain innate abilities provided athletes with an advantage over those that were not successful athletes. Specifically, Husband (1934) stated: “It would seem that first-rate athletes have some fundamental ability which the rest of us do not possess” (p. 592).

It is interesting to note that this statement is a very debated area within the field of sport psychology. Specifically, Husband concluded that there were certain abilities that allowed an individual to achieve athletic greatness. However, more recent theories developed in the late 1990s have suggested that what may appear to be talent possessed that others do not have may actually be many hours of practice over a long period of time (e.g., Ericcsson & Charness, 1994).

Husband presented the results of the research that measured the motor abilities of athletes at the 1932 APA meeting. In his presentation “Comparative Motor Abilities of Athletes and Non-athletes,” he described the results of investigations which utilized the Stanford Motor Skills Unit (Husband, 1932). He reported that athletes scored significantly higher than non-athletes on the motor skills ability tests that were measured. Thus, he believed that success in athletics could not be attributed to practice alone. In fact, at the 1932 APA meeting, Husband (“Athletes Best in Emergency, 1932”) stated: “Training alone…does not appear to be adequate to account for a high degree of athletic proficiency since some individuals achieve with very little practice a higher level of skill than others after years of effort” (p. 21). In later years, Husband (1949) expressed a slightly different viewpoint: “…it is difficult to isolate cause and effect relationships in determining whether athletic experience produces improved motor coordination or whether it existed already and enables the individual to do well in certain sports” (Husband, 1949, p. 783).

Studies of Athletes' Motor Abilities Directed by Carl and Harold Seashore

In addition to the work of R. H. Seashore, R. W. Husband and their students, Miles's mentor and colleague C. E. Seashore also directed research which analyzed whether the presence of various aptitudes could predict success in athletics (e.g., Murphy, 1930). For instance, Paul G. Murphy, under C. E. Seashore's supervision, utilized the Stanford Motor Skills Unit to determine if there was a relationship between scores on this instrument and basketball performance. Influenced to complete his research based upon R. H. Seashore's (1928) findings, Murphy tested 36 high school basketball players and correlated the results with basketball performance. Murphy (1930) found a positive relationship between scores on the Stanford Motor Skills Unit and basketball performance.⁵

Harold G. Seashore was also a student of C. E. Seashore; after completing his doctorate at the University of Iowa, H. G. Seashore (H. G. Seashore, 1933) became a professor of psychology at Springfield College. While a faculty member at Springfield he investigated the motor abilities of athletes with the assistance of a grant received from the National Research Council (H. G. Seashore, 1942). During this time, H. G. Seashore and his students completed studies on motor abilities and athletes in collaboration with Leonard Larson from the Springfield College Physical Education department (Adrian, 1938⁶; Atkinson as cited in Wollenberger, 1940; H. G. Seashore, 1942). These studies included Adrian's (1938) investigation, which did not find differences between athletes and non-athletes on a measure of balance and steadiness. Similarly, Atkinson (as cited in Seashore, 1942) also did not find a relationship between measures of fine motor skills and whole body balance and coordination of college basketball players. H. G. Seashore (1942) concluded from these studies that there was little correlation between the scores on fine motor skills tests and performance of gross motor skills.

Conclusion: To A Modern View of Sport Ability

The purpose of the present manuscript was to highlight the history of the study of the motor abilities of athletes during the early years of sport psychology. In particular, the present study focused on the work and influence of Walter R. Miles, who gained notoriety for his studies examining the reaction time of athletes during the 1920s and 1930s (Strang, 1935). Although previous scholars have described Walter Miles's interest and work on reaction time in football players (e.g., Baugh & Benjamin, 2006), the present study utilized primary source archival materials to explain Miles's involvement in additional studies that analyzed athletes' motor skills. In addition, this manuscript demonstrated how Miles, with his students and other colleagues, investigated the motor abilities of athletes throughout the 1920s and 1930s. A timeline (Table 1) was developed to highlight the study of the perceptual and motor abilities of athletes throughout the early years of sport psychology. The timeline specifically emphasizes the contributions of E. W. Scripture, C. E. Seashore, W. R. Miles, R. H. Seashore, R. W. Husband, and H. G. Seashore.

In the early 1890s, E. W. Scripture, a student of Wilhelm Wundt, promoted the application of the “new psychology” to physical education. While studying and serving as a psychological laboratory assistant under the guidance of E. W. Scripture, C. E. Seashore undoubtedly learned and observed the scientific application of the “new psychology” to the study of athletics. Interested in the psychology of sport, C. E. Seashore reviewed various works related to sports and athletics. Additionally, while at the University of Iowa he was a colleague of G. T. W. Patrick, who wrote the Psychology of Football (Patrick, 1903). Later, Walter Miles attended the University of Iowa and studied psychology under C. E. Seashore. Certainly, with C. E. Seashore's appreciation of how the “new psychology” could be applied to examine athletics, and Patrick's exploration of the psychology of football, a reasonable conclusion can be made that Miles gained an appreciation for the psychology of athletics while a doctoral student at the University of Iowa.

After completing his doctorate, Miles spent the first part of his career at the Carnegie Nutrition Laboratory, where athletes and physical activity were studied. Subsequent to his work at this laboratory, Miles conducted sport-related studies at both Stanford and Yale. Additionally, Miles's students and colleagues continued to investigate the motor abilities of athletes.

During the 1920s and 1930s, Miles and his colleagues were interested in determining if there were differences in various perceptual and motor abilities between less successful and more successful athletes (e.g., Murphy, 1930; Miles, 1931b; Miles, ca. 1934), between non-athletes and athletes (e.g., R. H. Seashore, 1928; Husband, 1932; R. H. Seashore & Adams, 1933) and younger and older athletes (e.g., Walton, 1932). These studies indicated that more successful athletes had faster reaction times than less successful athletes (Miles, 1931b; Miles, ca. 1934). Also, research utilizing the Stanford Motor Skills Unit to assess athletes' motor abilities found that athletes were more likely to score higher on the Stanford Motor Skills Unit test than non-athletes (Seashore, 1928; Husband, 1932). Thus, based on findings from these research studies psychologists began to ask the question of whether or not athletes were more likely to have innate skills that predisposed them for success in specific sports. In fact, psychologists proposed ideas for research studies in which science could potentially determine if having success in athletics was due to being born with a specific trait or was success due to long hours of effort and practice (e.g., Blakeslee, 1934).

The studies conducted by W. R. Miles, A. Walton, P. Buttenwieser, R. H. Seashore, R. W. Husband, and their students are an important part of the history of sport psychology and should not be forgotten. In particular, these studies are related to current theories of the development and maintenance of expertise in sport. The studies conducted by Miles and his colleagues were examples of how early psychology professionals investigated the individual differences of athletes.

A contemporary view of individual differences in sport is that both abilities and capabilities influence athletic potential (Wrisberg, 2007). In this view, “abilities” are perceptual and motor skills like reaction time or balance that are relatively stable and are not modifiable with practice, whereas “capabilities” are modifiable factors that can be enhanced through practice (Wrisberg, 2007). “Different athletes have different upper limits and these upper limits illustrate their level of ability” (p. 15). Thus, Wrisberg suggested that although athletes may have genetically pre-determined abilities that may limit their athletic potential, all athletes can improve their technical and tactical skills in their sport through practice (Wrisberg, 2007).

Ericsson (2013) posited that although individuals are genetically predetermined to have certain abilities that may provide them with an initial advantage, most of these abilities are modifiable through many hours of deliberate practice. Except for a few genetic traits (e.g., height and size), not having these innate characteristics may not prevent an individual from reaching an expert level of performance through deliberate practice over a long period of time (Ford, Hodges, & Williams, 2013). In summarizing the main issues related to whether becoming an expert athlete is limited by one's genetic potential, Abernethy, Farrow, and Berry (2003) suggested that there is agreement amongst scholars that a great deal of practice is necessary to achieve expert athletic performance. However, there is still debate about whether or not genetic characteristics can limit athletic potential or if any individual in good health can become an expert if he puts in enough deliberate practice (Abernethy, et al., 2003). In summarizing the research on this topic, Weinberg and Gould (2011) stated, “It is unclear how much of a role genetics plays in the development of expertise, although Ericsson argues that deliberate practice (environment) is the key determinant of the development of expertise” (p. 266).

When analyzing the information presented within the present manuscript, clearly Miles was involved and interested in various studies related to analyzing the motor skills of athletes. Not only did he conduct studies on football charging, but he also was involved in studies related to how motor skill ability in athletics was maintained, an athlete's age of peak performance in athletics, reaction time of trapshooters, and the personalities of athletes. Furthermore, his students, former students, and colleagues conducted research and presented their findings related to the motor abilities of athletes in peer reviewed journals and at national conferences (e.g., Husband, 1932; R. H. Seashore & Adams, 1933). Thus, from an historical point of view, the present research has demonstrated a clear lineage of support for the study of the motor abilities of athletes by early psychology professionals in North America. Starting with E. W. Scripture (a student of Wilhelm Wundt) in the 1890s, to C. E. Seashore, W. R. Miles, R. H. Seashore, R. W. Husband, and H. G. Seashore, the appreciation for the “new psychology” to be applied to the study of the motor skills of athletes was clear.

Footnotes

2

These individuals included Bernice Graves, Richard Husband, Lovic Herrington, Robert Seashore, and Albert Walton. Another student, Irvin Child, also conducted a study of athletes; however, it was not specific to the motor abilities of athletes. Child's study was titled, “The Relation Between Athletic Participation and Psychological Measures: Report of an Exploratory Study” (Child, ca. 1937). The main purpose of Child's (ca. 1937) investigation was to analyze the relationship of personality traits to an individual's choice of sport. Child administered the Freyd Occupational Interest Blank, the 15 min. Otis Self-Administering Test of Mental Ability (Higher, Form A), and the Bernreuter Personality Inventory to 48 swimmers, 13 boxers, and 23 wrestlers. Child reported that boxers and wrestlers were more neurotic, self-sufficient, and self-confident, but not as sociable as swimmers. Yale University coaches, Robert Kiphuth (swimming), William Newton (swimming), Edward O'Donnell (wrestling), and Moses King (boxing) assisted Child with the data collection process. Also, while at Stanford University, Miles supervised the doctoral dissertation of Lovic Pierce Herrington. One area that Herrington studied was the relationship of athletic motor ability to one's personality traits (Herrington, 1930). Herrington used the Cozens General Athletic Ability scale to measure a participant's level of athletic ability. After receiving permission from the Stanford Athletic Board of Control, Herrington tested participants on the Stanford athletic fields. Herrington discovered that individuals who were extroverted scored higher on a measure of athletic ability. Additionally, he also noted that of the 23 athletes who participated in the study, 15 were assessed to have an extroverted personality, while only eight had an introverted personality.

3

recognized the contributions of Seashore and his students by stating, “Robert Seashore and his students were also leaders in the exploration and assessment of motor skills during the late 1920s and 1930s” (p. 3).

4

Husband also studied the precompetitive emotion of athletes (Husband, 1935) and wrote a chapter on the psychology of athletics in his text, Applied Psychology (Husband, 1934; ).

5

A similar study was conducted at the University of Iowa a few years after the Murphy (1930) investigation. Cyril G. completed a thesis titled, “Sensory and Motor Rhythm, as Measured by Seashore Tests, as Factors Predicting Potential Skills in Basketball.”

6

In addition to Larson, influential physical educators Thomas K. Cureton and Peter Karpovich were also part of Adrian's master's thesis committee.

References

Abernethy

Farrow

Berry

(2003) Constraints and issues in the development of a general theory of expert perceptual-motor performance. In Starkes

Ericsson

K. A.

(Eds.), Expert performance in sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Pp. 349–369.

Adrian

(1938) A comparative study of steadiness of athletes and non-athletes. Unpublished master's thesis, Springfield College, Springfield, MA.

Alexander

(1929) Techniques for the study of motor skills in track. Unpublished master's thesis, Univer. of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

Angle

P. M.

(1975) Philip K. Wrigley: A memoir of a modest man. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally & Company.

Athlete Best in Emergency Says Bader. Wisconsin State Journal, 1932, 21, September 11.

Baugh

F. G.

Benjamin

L. T.

Jr. (2006) Walter Miles, Pop Warner, B. C. Graves and the psychology of football. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 42, 3–18. DOI: 10.1002/jhbs.20134

Blakeslee

H. W.

Good shots are born, not made, psychologists find. Syracuse Herald, 1934, 8, January 14.

Buttenwieser

(1935) Age and skill in expert chess players. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford Univer., Palo Alto, CA.

Cavanaugh

J. C.

Blanchard-Fields

(2014) Adult development and aging. (7th ed.) Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

10.

Child

[ca. 1937] The relation between athletic participation and psychological measures: Report of an exploratory study. In Miles Papers, Box 1145, Folder 2, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

11.

College Orators will Meet in Interstate Prohibition Contest. Oregonian, 1904, 10, May 22.

12.

Cratty

B. J.

(1973) Teaching motor skills. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

13.

Davis

(1928, April 21) Tests pick athletes. Science News Letter, 13(367), 245–246.

14.

Dorcus

(1923) Performances of athletes in coordination tests. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 3, 475–499. DOI: 10.1037/h0070140

15.

Ericsson

K. A.

(1990) Peak performance and age: An examination of peak performance and sports. In Baltes

P. B.

Baltes

M. M.

(Eds.), Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univer. Press. Pp. 164–195.

16.

Ericsson

K. A.

(2013) Training history, deliberate practice, and elite sport performance: An analysis in response to Tucker and Collins review – what makes champions? British Journal of Sports Medicine, 47, 533–535. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091767

17.

Ericsson

K. A.

Charness

(1994) Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition. American Psychologist, 49, 725–747. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.49.8.725

18.

Ewart

C. G.

(1933) Sensory and motor rhythm, as measured by Seashore tests, in predicting potential skills in basketball. Unpublished master's thesis, Univer. of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

19.

Ford

Hodges

N. J.

Williams

A. M.

(2013) Creating champions: The development of expertise in sport. In Kaufman

S. B.

(Ed.), The complexity of greatness: Beyond talent or practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univer. Press. Pp. 391–413. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199794003.003.0018

20.

Fuchs

(1998) Psychology and the babe. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 34, 153–165. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6696(199821)34:2<153::AID-JHBS3>3.0.CO;2-T

21.

Fullerton

(1921) Why Babe Ruth is greatest home run hitter. Popular Science Monthly, 99(4), 19–21, 110.

22.

Gilbert

A. R.

(1924) Some aspects of the psychology of tennis. Unpublished master's thesis, Univer. of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

23.

Goodwin

C. J.

(2003) An insider's look at experimental psychology in America: The diaries of Walter Miles. In Baker

(Ed.), Thick description and fine texture: Studies in the history of psychology. Akron, OH: The Univer. of Akron Press. Pp. 57–75.

24.

Graves

B. C.

(1927) Effect of signal variation on speed and uniformity of reaction in football. Unpublished master's thesis, Stanford Univer., Palo Alto, CA.

25.

Green

C. D.

Benjamin

L. T.

Jr. , (Eds.) (2009) Psychology gets in the game: Sport, mind, and behavior, 1880–1960. Lincoln, NB: Univer. of Nebraska Press.

26.

Griffith

C. R.

(1930) Studies in the psychology of athletics. Journal of Health and Physical Education, 1(3), 9–12, 60.

27.

Herrington

L. P.

(1930) The physiological psychology of introverts and extroverts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford Univer., Palo Alto, CA.

28.

Hilgard

E. R.

(1980) Walter Richard Miles: 1885–1978. The American Journal of Psychology, 93, 564–568.

29.

Holmes

Harry Wills passes tests showing his fitness to meet Jack Dempsey. Bridgeport Telegram, 1922, 7, May 2.

30.

Husband

R. W.

(1929) Analysis of methods in human maze learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford Univer., Palo Alto, CA.

31.

Husband

R. W.

(1932) Comparative motor abilities of athletes and non-athletes. Psychological Bulletin, 29, 684–685.

32.

Husband

R. W.

(1934) Applied psychology. New York: Harper.

33.

Husband

R. W.

(1935) A study of the emotion of excitement. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 46, 465–470. DOI: 10.1080/08856559.1935.10533174

34.

Husband

R. W.

(1949) Applied psychology. (2nd ed.) New York: Harper.

35.

Iowa Man Gets Fine Position. Daily Iowan, 1913, 1, March 6.

36.

Lehman

H. C.

(1937) Chronological age and several kinds of superior performance. Psychological Bulletin, 34, 764–765.

37.

Lehman

H. C.

(1938) The most proficient years at sports and games. Research Quarterly for the American Association of Health and Physical Education, 11, 11–19.

38.

Miles

W. R.

(1928a) How fast can you get away? Scientific American, 138, 226–229. DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican0328-226

39.

Miles

W. R.

(1928b) Studies in physical exertion: I. A multiple chronograph for measuring groups of men. American Physical Education Review, 33, 379–387. DOI: 10.1080/23267224.1928.10652006

40.

Miles

W. R.

(1931a) Measures of certain human abilities throughout the lifespan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 17(12), 627–633.

41.

Miles

W. R.

(1931b) Studies in physical exertion: II. Individual and group reaction time in football charging. Research Quarterly for Health and Physical Education, 2(3), 4–13. DOI: 10.1080/23267402.1931.10625036

42.

Miles

W. R.

(1932a, February 12) [Letter to Amateur Trapshooting Association]. In Miles Papers, Box M1148, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

43.

Miles

W. R.

(1932b, February 12) [Letter to Dominion of Canada Rifle Association]. In Miles Papers, Box M1148, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

44.

Miles

W. R.

(1932c, February 12) [Letter to National Rifle Association of Great Britain]. In Miles Papers, Box M1148, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

45.

Miles

W. R.

(1932d, January 16) [Letter to Rod and Gun Company]. In Miles Papers, Box M1148, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

46.

Miles

W. R.

(1932e, February) [Letter to The American Rifleman]. In Miles Papers, Box M1148, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

47.

Miles

W. R.

(1933a) Age and human ability. Psychological Review, 40, 99–123. DOI: 10.1037/h0075341

48.

Miles

W. R.

(1933b) [Letter to John Dashiell]. In Miles Papers, Box M1148, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

49.

Miles

W. R.

[ca. 1934] Reaction time of trapshooters. In Miles Papers, Box M1154, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

50.

Miles

W. R.

(1935a) Age and human society. In Murchison

(Ed.), A handbook of social psychology. Worcester, MA: Clark Univer. Press. Pp. 596–682.

51.

Miles

W. R.

(1935b) Training, practice, and mental longevity. Science, 81, 79–87. DOI: 10.1126/science.81.2091.79

52.

Miles

W. R.

(1956) Carl Emil Seashore 1866–1949: A biographical memoir. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science.

53.

Miles

W. R.

(1963) The Stanford University studies of later maturity. In Miles Papers, Box M1102, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

54.

Miles

W. R.

(1967) Walter R. Miles. In Boring

E. G.

Lindzey

(Eds.), A history of psychology in autobiography. Vol. V. East Norwalk, CT: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Pp. 221–252.

55.

Miles

W. R.

Graves

B. C.

(1931) Studies in physical exertion: III. Effect of signal variation on football charging. Research Quarterly for Health and Physical Education, 2(3), 14–31. DOI: 10.1080/23267402.1931.10625037

56.

Miller

(1980) Obituary: Walter R. Miles (1885–1978). American Psychologist, 35, 595–596. DOI: 10.1037/h0078352

57.

Murphy

P. G.

(1930) The utilization of the Stanford Motor Skills Unit in the field of athletics. Unpublished master's thesis, Univer. of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

58.

Nixon

E. W.

Concerning “Why is an athlete?”

Los Angeles Times, 1919, 3, December 9.

59.

Patrick

G. T. W.

(1903) Psychology of football. American Journal of Psychology, 14, 104–117. DOI: 10.2307/1412309

60.

Poser

J. F.

(1933) Comparisons of motor reactions of the athlete and non-athlete. Unpublished bachelor's thesis, Univer. of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.

61.

Psychologist Tells How to Prolong Mental Life. (1935, January 12) Science News Letter, 27(718), 23.

62.

Pugsley

(1934, April 19) [Letter to Walter Miles]. In Miles Papers, Box M1123, Folder 6, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

63.

Robinson

E. H.

(1932, March 7) [Letter to Walter Miles]. In Miles Papers, Box M1154, Folder 4, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

64.

Scripture

E. W.

(1894) Tests of mental ability as exhibited in fencing. Studies from the Yale Psychological Laboratory, 2, 122–124.

65.

Seashore

C. E.

(1899) Dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition [Review]. Psychological Review, 6, 330. DOI: 10.1037/h0069301

66.

Seashore

H. G.

(1933) An analysis of vocal performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

67.

Seashore

H. G.

(1942) Some relationships of fine and gross motor abilities. Research Quarterly of the American Association for Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 13, 259–274. DOI: 10.1080/10671188.1942.10624754

68.

Seashore

R. H.

(1927) Measurement of motor skills (with moving picture demonstration). Psychological Bulletin, 25, 194–195.

69.

Seashore

R. H.

(1928) Stanford motor skills unit. Psychological Monographs, 39, 51–66.

70.

Seashore

R. H.

(1930) Individual differences in motor skills. Journal of General Psychology, 3, 38–66. DOI: 10.1080/00221309.1930.9918189

71.

Seashore

R. H.

Adams

R. D.

(1933) The measurement of steadiness: A new apparatus and results on marksmanship. Science, 78, 285–287. DOI: 10.1126/science.78.2022.285

72.

Seashore Talks on Physical Training. The Daily Iowan, 1927, 1, June 16.

73.

Steadiness Tests May Pick Marksmen Before They Shoot. (1934, January 20) Science News Letter, 25(667), 37.

74.

Steen

(1932) Individual differences of motor ability between the athlete and the non-athlete. Unpublished bachelor's thesis, Univer. of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.

75.

Stone

C. P.

(1931, August 17) [Letter to Walter Miles]. In Miles Papers, Box M1148, Folder 7, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

76.

Strang

(1935) Health and physical education. Review of Educational Research, 5, 48–53.

77.

Terman

Miles

W. R.

(1928) A program of psychological research on the later period of maturity. In Miles Papers, Box M1148, Folder 5, Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

78.

Walton

(1929, July 3) [Letter to Walter Miles]. In Miles Papers, Box M1148, Folder 5. Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

79.

Walton

(1932) The effect of age on motor abilities in athletes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford Univer., Palo Alto, CA.

80.

Walton

(1940a) Age and motor abilities in athletes. In Miles Papers, Box M1172, Folder 6. Archives of the History of American Psychology. Palo Alto, CA: Univer. of Akron.

81.

Walton

(1940b, September 25) [Letter to Walter Miles]. In Miles Papers, Box M1199.2, Folder 3. Archives of the History of American Psychology. Akron, OH: Univer. of Akron.

82.

Weinberg

R. S.

Gould

(2011) Foundations of sport and exercise psychology. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

83.

Wollenberger

(1940) Characteristics of Springfield College students majoring in health and physical education. Unpublished master's thesis, Springfield College, Springfield, MA.

84.

Wrisberg

(2007) Sport skill instruction for coaches. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.