Generality of the matching law as a descriptor of shot selection in basketball.
Basketball shot charts give a clear, real-world picture of the matching law for staff or student training.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The authors looked at real basketball games. They tracked every shot taken by college and pro players.
They asked: do players pick shots the way the matching law says? The law says choices follow payoff rates.
What they found
The matching law fit the data well. Most shot choices lined up with point values.
Players slightly favored three-pointers. The pattern held for both college and NBA teams.
How this fits with other research
Schenk et al. (2020) ran a video-game test. Six of nine players matched shot choices to programmed 2- vs 3-point payoffs. Both studies show the law works in basketball.
Hall (1992) found kids' classroom time matched teacher attention only when prizes were equal. The basketball study adds a field example where payoff is already clear: points on the board.
Houston (1982) warned the math can break. The 2009 data still fit, because basketball gives clean, countable reinforcers.
Why it matters
You now have a sports example your clients know. Use shot charts to teach the matching law in staff trainings. Show how choice shifts as point values change. It makes reinforcement rate click without jargon.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Open a game highlight video, count 2- and 3-point attempts with staff, and map the ratio to the scoreboard payoff.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Based on a small sample of highly successful teams, past studies suggested that shot selection (two- vs. three-point field goals) in basketball corresponds to predictions of the generalized matching law. We examined the generality of this finding by evaluating shot selection of college (Study 1) and professional (Study 3) players. The matching law accounted for the majority of variance in shot selection, with undermatching and a bias for taking three-point shots. Shot-selection matching varied systematically for players who (a) were members of successful versus unsuccessful teams, (b) competed at different levels of collegiate play, and (c) served as regulars versus substitutes (Study 2). These findings suggest that the matching law is a robust descriptor of basketball shot selection, although the mechanism that produces matching is unknown.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2009 · doi:10.1901/jaba.2009.42-595