https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/physical-training/sound-cue-draw-feedback Changes to this claim in Matteo Campagna's evidence registry: its status, its year-by-year history, revisions of the page. en-gb https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/physical-training/sound-cue-draw-feedbackThere is a single experiment, from 1993, and it answers yes for five archers out of six and no for the sixth. A sensor on the drawing hand recorded every small collapse in the final phase of the draw, and when the collapse exceeded a threshold a computer sounded a tone until the hand returned to where it had been: with the cue switched on, the draw's average distance from its trend line falls in five archers, for example from 2.34 to 1.69 and from 0.84 to 0.65, and in one it rises sharply, from 2.53 to 4.27. The score, on the other hand, does not improve significantly, and the authors suggest that the extra information draws attention away from other things. There is a design problem too: the series with the tone always came after the one without, because the threshold was set on the first, so part of the improvement may simply be practice. The principle is the same as in many real-time feedback devices sold to archers today, but on archers it has been tried once, on six people, and it did not work for all of them.claim:biofeedback-sonoro-trazione:revision:2026-05-19:2Tue, 19 May 2026 08:00:00 GMT https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/physical-training/sound-cue-draw-feedbackclaim:biofeedback-sonoro-trazione:new_claim:2026-04-04:contestatoSat, 04 Apr 2026 08:00:00 GMT