Esta aqui:Inicio | Time reaction and decision making in goalball Comparing Goalball athletes and non-athletes |
|
|
ABSTRACT Concerning to the motor control, we can present several models of velocity-accuracy response. Some of them try to demonstrate that reaction time (TCRT) is influenced (a) by the capacity of response-processing; (b) by a number of alternatives and (c) by the execution time. Goalball can be played by visual handicapped persons. We studied the reaction time and decision making in the Goalball athletes, and other subjects without physical activity’s practice. The sample (N=42) had 2 male groups: athletes (n=21) and non athletes (n=21). We used descriptive and inferential (t Student test) statistics (significance level = p≤.05). Concerning the results, we found significant differences intra-groups: (i) for SRT: athletes presented better scores to preferential hand (p=.003) and foot (p=.000); (ii) for TCRT: athletes presented better performances in the first trial (p=.05); (iii) for decision making: non athletes presented better performances (p=.012); Goalball practice seems to improve subject’s simple and complex reaction time. However, according to the decision making the differences were not significant, and concerning to the decision errors the non players performed better. We suggest, like Zelaznick et al. (1996), that an improvement in time required for programming produces an increase in TCRT. Goalball athletes are more accurate at implementing strategies and more conscious about the negative effects of an inconvenient action in game. AIM OF THE STUDY To compare the levels of motor performance between Goalball athletes and non¬athletes, concerning the: METHODOLOGY Sample: 42 visual impaired men 21 Goalball athlets - 85% of the Goalball athletes during the season 21 Non-athletes Ages between 18 and 51 years old Evaluation Instrument The “Dufour’s PD12 Attention Diffusé” instrument show the time in hundred of seconds (100/s), recording the time, the errors and the stimuli. Subjects answered to auditive stimuli as fast as they could, trying not to commit errors. Statistical procedures To compare both groups (athletes and non-athletes) we used the Mann Whitney’s test. The level of significance was set at .05 Simple Reaction Time Las imágenes, tablas, ilustraciones, y/o gráficas, se encuentran en el CD Nº1 de la Colección Congresos. Table1- The Simple Reaction Time in the athletes of Goalball and non athletes We can see that the lowest scores correspond to the best performance, what means that the subjects answered faster to the auditory incentives. The differences are statistically significant. Two-Choosing Reaction Time Las imágenes, tablas, ilustraciones, y/o gráficas, se encuentran en el CD Nº1 de la Colección Congresos. Table2 – Two-Choosing Reaction Time in the athletes of Goalball and non athletes The two-choosing reaction time results were obtained through the record of the times of the first and second sequences (sixteen stimuli each), being obtained a general results in the end. For the analysis of the table 2, the presented scores demonstrate that differences are statistically significant related to two-choosing reaction time in the first sequence. However, this situation if not verified in second sequence. In the general, the Goalball athletes at two-chosing reaction time is better, not having been (the difference among the two groups) statistically significant. Answering Errors Las imágenes, tablas, ilustraciones, y/o gráficas, se encuentran en el CD Nº1 de la Colección Congresos. Table3 – Answering Errors in the athletes of Goalball and non athletes In the analysis of the medium number of answer mistakes, the difference between Goalball athletes and non-athletes is statistically significant. It is verified that Goalball athletes present a large number of mistakes. Las imágenes, tablas, ilustraciones, y/o gráficas, se encuentran en el CD Nº1 de la Colección Congresos. Table4 – Decision Time in the athletes of Goalball and non athletes In the table we have the result of decision time, where we can see that non-athletes waist less time to decide than Goalball athletes. However, the differences are not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS Goalball athletes present better performance in SPR and TCRT practices show an evaluation of the Reaction Time Non-athletes present better performance in Errors and DT. Bibliography Rodrigues, N. (2002). Goalball – Estudo sobre o estado de conhecimento da modalidade e avaliação desportivo-motora dos atletas. Tese de Mestrado em Actividade Física Adaptada. FCDEF-UP. Porto. Pereira, L.(1987). Contribuição para o estudo do papel dos sentidos na organização de informação. Análise do equilíbrio e da estruturação espacial de uma população escolar dos 6 aos 13 anos, de capacidade visual nula ou muito reduzida de estabelecimento precoce. Tese de Doutoramento. UTL – FMH. Lisboa. Proteau, L.; Girouard, Y.(1987). La prise de Décision Rapide en Situation de Choix Dichotomique : une approche intégrée qui tient compte de l´amorce et de l´éxécution de la réponse. Revue Canadienne de Psychologie, 41(4), 442-473. Tavares, F.(1993). A capacidade de decisão táctica no jogo de Basquetebol. Tese de Doutoramento. FCDEF-UP. Porto. Zlaznik, H.; Hawkins, B. e Kisselburgh, L.(1996). Rapid Visual Feedback Processing in Single-Aiming Movements. J. Motor Behavior, 3:217-236.
|
|||||
Colección Congresos nº1 
- Pontevedra 2006. 
 |
Copyright © 2005 - 2012 Alto Rendimiento C/ Rigoberto Albors nº 9 · 03801 Alcoy (Alicante) Tel.: 96 633 71 35 · Skype: altorendimiento · info@altorendimiento.net |
