ABSTRACT
The importance of visuomotor reactions in sports is inevitable; however, its assessment using computer-based tests raises the question, if results are transferable to sport-specific situations. Since computer-based simple reaction tests are widely used by sport scientists and practioners, this study examined their relation to sport-specific visuomotor reaction speed and performance. Seventeen international young elite table tennis players performed a simple visuomotor reaction test in response to stimuli presented on a computer screen (laboratory experiment) as well as table tennis balls played by a ball robot (sport-specific experiment). A sport-specific cued choice reaction task served as a control condition. The visuomotor reaction time (VMRT) was determined for all tasks. In addition, neurophysiological correlates of visual perception/processing speed (N2/N2-r) were measured in the laboratory experiment. The VMRT and neurophysiological parameters measured in the laboratory experiment predicted the sport-specific reaction speed (VMRT: r = 0.62; N2: r = 0.51; N2-r: r = −0.47) as well as sport-specific visuomotor performance reflected by the number of successfully hit balls (VMRT: r = −0.68; N2: r = −0.65; N2-r: r = 0.50). This did not apply to the choice reaction task. This study suggests computer-based behavioural and neurophysiological indices of visuomotor reaction time are directly related to the sport-specific visuomotor speed and performance in a more ecologically valid setting.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the National Table Tennis Federation in Luxembourg (FLTT), the National Sports Institute (Institute National des Sports [INS]) in Luxembourg, the International Table Tennis Federation (ITTF), the European Table Tennis Union (ETTU) and well as the China Table Tennis College Europe (CTTCE) for supporting this study. Further, we want to thank all athletes for their participation. This study was supported by the Luxembourg Institute of Research in Orthopedics, Sports Medicine and Science under the grant number (2017/1). The sponsor had no role in designing and conducting the study as well as during data analysis and interpretation of results.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.