Effect of different sport environments on proactive and reactive motor inhibition: A study on open- and closed-skilled athletes via mouse-tracking procedure.

Autor:	Bravi R; Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy., Gavazzi G; Department of Neuroscience, Psychology, Drug Research and Child's Health (NEUROFARBA), University of Florence, Florence, Italy.; IRCCS SDN, Naples, Italy., Benedetti V; Department of Neuroscience, Psychology, Drug Research and Child's Health (NEUROFARBA), University of Florence, Florence, Italy., Giovannelli F; Department of Neuroscience, Psychology, Drug Research and Child's Health (NEUROFARBA), University of Florence, Florence, Italy., Grasso S; Department of Physiology and Pharmacology 'Vittorio Erspamer', SAPIENZA University of Rome, Rome, Italy., Panconi G; Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy., Viggiano MP; Department of Neuroscience, Psychology, Drug Research and Child's Health (NEUROFARBA), University of Florence, Florence, Italy., Minciacchi D; Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Frontiers in psychology [Front Psychol] 2022 Dec 12; Vol. 13, pp. 1042705. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Dec 12 (Print Publication: 2022).
DOI:	10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1042705
Abstrakt:	This study aimed to investigate the effect of different sport environments (open-and closed-skill sports) on proactive and reactive inhibitory processes as two distinct components of motor inhibition. A mouse-tracking procedure was employed to compare behavioral performance among three groups of participants (tennis players, swimmers and non-athletes) in non-sport-specific cued Go/No-Go (GNG) and Stop Signal Task (SST), which mainly engage proactive and reactive inhibitory control, respectively. Reaction times (RTs), inhibitory failures, and Stop Signal Reaction Times (SSRTs) were measured. To investigate dynamic aspects of inhibitory control, movement trajectories classified as one-shot (absence of trajectory alteration reflected in a steep slope) or non-one-shot (non-linear/multipeaked trajectory, with one or multiple corrections) were analyzed and compared among groups. Results showed no group differences in RTs in Go/No-Go and Stop conditions. SSRTs were significant shorter for the athletes than non-athletes in SST, but no differences emerged for inhibitory failures in cued GNG. During inhibitory failures athletes showed higher proportion of non-one-shot movements than non-athletes. Higher proportion of non-one-shot profiles was observed in cued GNG compared to SST. Finally, no differences between open-and closed-skilled athletes were found in both tasks. Our findings suggest that both proactive and reactive inhibitory controls do benefit from sport practice, but open-and closed-skill sports do not differ in influencing inhibitory processes. Movement profile analysis could be a promising, complementary behavioral analysis to integrate for more fine-grained evaluation and differentiation of inhibitory motor control in athletes, specifically when using GNG tasks. Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. (Copyright © 2022 Bravi, Gavazzi, Benedetti, Giovannelli, Grasso, Panconi, Viggiano and Minciacchi.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu