Studying the rules online as well means beginners make fewer mistakes when judging a competition

1 study · 24 archers measured

There is one study, a small one, run inside a university course. Twenty-four Chinese students who had never shot, in two non-randomised classes of twelve, followed the same eight-week recurve course with the same teacher; one class also studied the rules on an online platform, where the materials served as the judge's and the supervisor's manual. In the final simulated competition, where everyone took turns as athlete, judge and supervisor, the blended class built up 12 mistakes in applying the rules and the traditional class 23. The direction matches the claim, but the mistakes are counted per class rather than per person, there is no statistical test and the difference could come down to one or two students; on top of that the online class also studied for longer, so it is unclear whether the medium matters or simply the amount of study. Reported, only just.

Also phrased as: "learning the rules online"; "training novice judges"; "blended archery course"; "judging mistakes by beginners"; "studying the competition rules"

In practice

It is said that the rules are learnt in competition rather than from a book: on courses they are explained out loud on the shooting line, and the rest comes the first time an arrow on the line has to be called.

Evidence

2023
For Archers Published later

24 Chinese university students with no shooting experience, two non-randomised classes of 12, an eight-week recurve course with one 90-minute lesson a week: in the final simulated competition, with groups rotating between two teams of athletes, one of judges and one of supervisors, the mistakes in applying the rules are 12 in the blended class and 23 in the traditional one. No statistical test, mistakes counted per class.

On the Curricular Innovation Practice of the Recurve Bow Based on Blended Teaching · Zhe Zhang, Xiaoyuan Huang, Bing Zhang

Status history

1990 Not studied No one in the registry's bibliography has yet measured the rule mistakes made by beginners trained in different ways: the question is not asked.
2023 Reported Twenty-four Chinese university students, complete beginners, in two non-randomised classes over eight weeks. In the final simulated competition, where everyone also takes a turn as judge and supervisor, the class that studied the rules on a blended course, in the classroom and online, builds up 12 mistakes in applying them against 23 for the traditional class. There is no statistical test and the mistakes are counted per class: reported, and only just.

Research lines

Cite

APA

Campagna, M. (2026). Studying the rules online as well means beginners make fewer mistakes when judging a competition (Version 1). In Evidence Registry. Retrieved 16 October 2026, from https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/competition/online-rules-study-novice-judges

BibTeX

@misc{campagna2026_regolamentoonlinearbitri,
  author = {Campagna, Matteo},
  title = {Studying the rules online as well means beginners make fewer mistakes when judging a competition},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {Evidence Registry, matteocampagna.com},
  url = {https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/competition/online-rules-study-novice-judges},
  note = {Version 1; accessed 2026-10-16}
}

Follow this claim

RSS feed for this claim

RSS is an address you paste into a feed reader: each time this claim changes status, adds a year to its history or is revised, a new item appears there.

Other claims in this domain

See all claims on competition and scoring