Critical Thinking Volleyball Tactics

NCT07253597 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: Volley_USB_TdeA
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 24
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

This quasi-experimental study will examine whether a Tactical Critical Thinking Program (TPCT) can improve technical-tactical decision-making in university volleyball players compared with usual training. In many university teams, practice is dominated by repetitive technical drills and coach-centred instruction, with limited opportunities for players to analyse the game, discuss options with teammates, or reflect critically on their decisions. The study compares two groups of adult male volleyball players from a university-level programme in Colombia. The intervention group completed a 4-week Tactical Critical Thinking Program integrated into regular volleyball practice, while the comparison group continued with their usual training routines, without structured reflection or guided questioning. The TPCT uses representative game-based tasks, short planned pauses for group discussion, and questions that prompt players to identify tactical problems, generate alternative solutions, justify their choices, and adjust strategies collectively. All participants assessed before and after the 4-week period. Assessments included validated technical skill tests for serve, reception and spike, and standardised small-sided games (4 vs 4) recorded on video. Trained observers coded each action to calculate decision-making indices for the three key skills, expressing the proportion of tactically appropriate decisions during play. The primary aim was to determine whether adding structured tactical reflection and critical thinking activities to volleyball practice produces greater improvements in decision-making than usual training alone. A secondary aim was to explore whether the TPCT also enhances technical execution. Findings are expected to inform coaches and physical education professionals about how to design cognitively enriched, game-representative training for university team sports.

Conditions

Decision Making; Athletic Performance; Volleyball

Keywords

Tactical Critical Thinking Program; Volleyball; Team sports; Decision making; Technical-tactical skills

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Change in decision-making index during standardized game situations

  Decision-making index during standardized small-sided volleyball games (for serve, reception and spike). The index represents the proportion of tactically appropriate actions out of the total number of coded actions in 4 vs 4 games on a regulation court. Actions are coded from video by trained observers using predefined criteria (for example, serve to vulnerable zones, reception directed to an optimal setting area, spike to uncovered spaces). Higher scores indicate a greater proportion of tactically appropriate decisions. Analyses compare change from baseline to post-intervention between the Tactical Critical Thinking Program arm and the usual-training control arm.

  Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)

Secondary Outcomes (3)

• Change in decision-making index for serve

  Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)

• Change in decision-making index for reception

  Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)

• Change in decision-making index for spike

  Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)

Study Arms (2)

TPCT

EXPERIMENTAL

Participants in this arm attend their usual university volleyball practices enriched with the Tactical Critical Thinking Program. Training follows the regular team schedule (approximately three 90-minute sessions per week for 4 weeks) and is fully integrated into routine practice. The intervention adds game-based drills and small-sided games focused on serve, reception and spike, combined with brief, structured pauses. During these pauses, the coach guides players to analyse recent sequences, identify tactical problems, propose and justify alternatives and agree collective adjustments. A final phase of more open play emphasises applying these decisions, with prompts that foster metacognition. Training volume and physical workload are comparable to the comparison arm; the distinctive element is the structured critical-thinking and reflective-dialogue component.

Other: Tactical Critical Thinking Program plus usual volleyball training

C-TPCT

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Participants in this arm attend their usual university volleyball practices without any added reflective component. Training follows the regular team schedule (approximately three 90-minute sessions per week for 4 weeks) and includes standard warm-up, physical preparation, technical drills and team play focused on serve, reception, spike and defensive actions, as determined by the coaching staff. Coaches do not implement the protocolised reflective pauses or guided questioning used in the experimental arm. Training volume, frequency and overall intensity remain comparable to those of the intervention arm, so that the main planned difference between groups is the absence of the structured critical-thinking and collaborative-reflection activities in this control condition.

Other: Usual volleyball training

Interventions

Tactical Critical Thinking Program plus usual volleyball training OTHER

Behavioral intervention integrated into regular university men's volleyball practice. The program adds structured reflective pauses and guided questioning to usual training content (serve, reception, spike and team play). Sessions use game-based drills and small-sided games under modified constraints to elicit tactically demanding situations. After short sequences of play, the coach leads brief discussions in which players identify tactical problems, generate and justify alternatives and agree collective adjustments. A final phase of open play emphasises applying these decisions while promoting metacognitive reflection. Training frequency, duration and physical workload remain comparable to the control arm; the distinctive element is the protocolised critical-thinking and collaborative-reflection component.

TPCT

Usual volleyball training OTHER

Behavioral condition consisting of the team's standard university men's volleyball training program with no added reflective component. Sessions include warm-up, general physical preparation, technical drills for serve, reception, spike and defence, positional work and team play under normal coaching practice. Coaches do not apply the structured reflective pauses or guided questioning protocol used in the experimental arm. Training schedule, session duration and general intensity are maintained as similar as possible to the intervention arm so that the principal difference between arms is the absence of the Tactical Critical Thinking Program.

C-TPCT

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years+
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Age 18 years or older
• University volleyball player enrolled in the participating programme in Medellín, Colombia
• Regular participation in team training (at least two organised sessions per week before study enrolment)
• Medically cleared and physically able to take part in full volleyball training and match play
• Availability to attend the majority of scheduled intervention and assessment sessions over the ≈ 4-week study period
• Provision of written informed consent

You may not qualify if:

• Current musculoskeletal injury or medical condition that limits safe participation in volleyball training or matches
• Any medical contraindication to high-intensity intermittent exercise as reported by the participant or team medical staff
• Planned absence that would prevent attendance at baseline or post-intervention assessments or more than 20% of training sessions
• Concurrent participation in another structured intervention specifically targeting tactical decision-making or psychological skills in volleyball
• Withdrawal of consent at any point before completion of post-intervention assessments

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Federal University of Vicosa: lead

Study Sites (1)

Universidad de San Buenaventura - Cartagena

Cartagena, Colombia

Location

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: NON RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: BASIC SCIENCE
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: PhD

Model Details: Quasi-experimental, non-randomized, parallel assignment with two arms. Participants belong to one university men's volleyball programme and remain in a single arm for the entire study. One arm receives usual volleyball training enriched with the Tactical Critical Thinking Program (structured reflective pauses and guided questioning within game-based practice). The comparison arm continues with usual training only, without the structured reflective component. Both arms follow similar schedules, volumes and intensities of training. Outcomes are assessed at baseline and at the end of the intervention period to compare pre-post changes between arms.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: November 18, 2025
• First Posted: November 28, 2025
• Study Start: September 1, 2025
• Primary Completion: October 15, 2025
• Study Completion: October 30, 2025
• Last Updated: November 28, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-11

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will share
• Shared Documents: STUDY PROTOCOL, SAP
• Time Frame: IPD are available starting approximately 6 months after publication of the main results paper and remain available for at least 5 years thereafter, or as long as the dataset is curated by the investigators.
• Access Criteria: Researchers send a brief proposal describing objectives, methods and requested variables to the corresponding author. Proposals are reviewed by the study team and, when applicable, by the institutional ethics committee. Once approved, data are shared in de-identified format under a data use agreement that limits use to the approved project, forbids attempts at re-identification and excludes commercial use.

Locations

CO (1)