This project was conducted in order to examine visual of the elite athletes and compared the different visual abilities between elite and non-elite athletes by employing seven different visual ability tests. After administring the visual ability tests, important visual characteristics which might have important role to become elite athetes were identified. In the second experiment, two different visual abilities(dynamic visual acuity and depth perception) selected in order to examine the visual training effect for baseball hitting performance for these visual abilities had shown the most relevant visual characteristics for batting performance in the first experiment. The results revealed there were different visual characteristics between athletes in different sports (archery, shooting, ice hockey, baseball), and elite and non-elite athletes. The results also found specific relationship between certain visual characteristics and the sports events. The results of the second experiment revealed the subjects in the experiment group(visual training group) improved their visual abilities significantly through specially designed visual training in the laboratory and the improved visual abilities had positive effect on batting performance in the field.

We could say that the knowledge of results is very important factors in the motor skill learning. This paper was analyzed to stipulate how inside-kick of soccer affect to perform when we present the accuracy of the knowledge of results and post-knowledge of results interval. I randomly selected 60 students in the Hakjin elementary school in Busan, and divided 6 groups. The results were as follows. 1. The qualitative and quantitative knowledge of results in the early motor learning stages were not significant difference in each other of the exercise and the transfer performance. 2. When we tried various time interval of the post-knowledge of results interval in the early motor learning stages, there was very significant difference at P=0.05 level in transfer performance . 3. There was no significant between the accuracy of the knowledge of results and post-knowleclge of results in interaction effects. 4. The most effectively performed group in this experiment was as the quantitative knowledge of results who performed 6 seconds of post-knowledge of results interval.