“Neurophysiological correlates of interference control and response inhibition processes in children and adolescents engaging in open- and closed-skill sports”
DISCLAIMER: I am not a medical professional and I may not use all terms correctly. Please cite the study at the bottom of my blog!
Hello reader, after my 7 month hiatus I am officially bringing back this blog. I plan on bringing together all of the knowledge I have gained on this subject and performing a test at some point in the near future. Till then, I will be analyzing a recent study titled “Neurophysiological correlates of interference control and response inhibition processes in children and adolescents engaging in open- and closed-skill sports” by authors: Sebastian Ludyga, Manuel Mücke, Christian Andrä, Markus Gerber, and Uwe Pühse.
Purpose:
The premise of this study is to expand on the concept that sports promote inhibitory control. The goal was to understand how specific sports categories plays a role in the development of inhibitory control.
More about inhibitory control: Inhibitory control, a topic I have been researching for quite a while, plays a major role in executive functions. It is defined as the ability to suppress one’s desire to do an action that is unlikely to accomplish a desired result. A fencing analogy would be the desire to lunge even though the distance may seem good in a moment. Inhibitory control seems to be developed when one is in their childhood. *Find more about this on my blog regarding summer nationals. Additional impacts of the development of inhibitory control include better academic achievement, mental health, and lower vulnerability to substance abuse in adolescence. More importantly, developing inhibitory control can counteract cognitive decline as one gets older.
TThe study explains that coordinative exercise may be related to inhibitory control through its fundamental movement skills and require a common neural substrate. The study hypothesizes that open-skill sports require a greater response inhibition when one stops or adjusts movements in response to changes in the environment, creating unpredictability. In contrast, closed motor skill participants do not require the same motor responses as closed motorsports and are often predictable. The key difference between open and motor skill sports has been the premise for my argument for why fencing increases inhibitory control. The correlation between inhibition type, sports type, and inhibitory control can be observed through behavioral processes. The study mentions that conflict monitoring and allocation of attentional resources contribute to response inhibition.
Terms:
Conflict monitoring: Process that detects the conflict and initiates control processes to resolve said conflict
Allocation of Attentional Resources: Via attentional mechanisms, humans select a limited amount of sensory input to process while another sensory input is neglected. Essentially, the ability to block out extra information.
Conflict monitoring is observed by components of Go/No-go and Stroop color-word tasks, respectively. Go/No-go tasks – a task that has been seen in previous studies – require participants to respond to “go” and “no go” stimuli. The stroop color-word task is a neuropsychological test used to determine inhibit cognitive interference that occurs when the processing of a specific stimulus halts the processing of a second stimulus. Both of these tasks trigger a positive magnitude of reaction that peaks in the parietal/centro–parietal regions in children and adolescents.
In short the purpose is to perform these tests and understand how inhibitory control differs between regular engagement in open- and closed-skill sports in adolescents.
Methods:
- 184 male and female children and adolescents were recruited from local schools
- 9 -14 years old with right-hand dominance
- Exclusion of anyone with possible mental disorder
Procedure:
- Electroencephalographic activity – electrical brain activity
- Go/No go task:
- Participants were instructed to press a button on a serial response box to 2 types of Go trials and suppress their motor response to NoGo
- 3 colors (pink, blue, yellow) were assigned to GoFrequent, Go, and NoGo trials
- 3 blocks with 100 trials each
- Stroop Color Word task
- Participants were instructed to respond to the color of a word, but not its meaning (Ex. The word blue written in the color yellow)
- Visual stimuli were presented against a black background for 200 ms, and responses were collected within 1500 ms after their onset.
- 4 blocks with 36 trials each
- Measuring reaction time
Results:
- Greater time spent on open skill sports yielded better results on the tests showing a greater inhibitory control
- There was not a significant association between closed motor skill sports and a higher reaction time
Conclusion:
The findings from this study prove that there is a strong association between engagement in open-skill sports and conflict monitoring which demands inhibitory control. To rephrase, conflict monitoring In terms of sports, open-skill athletes may have a greater ability to assess conflicts sports scenarios that require complex movements and inhibitory control. In other words, improved conflict monitoring, is the core reason why fencers have a greater inhibitory control, cognitive ability, and reaction time. As a fencer, one must be able to assess conflicts while keeping their technique while simultaneously observing the moment to perform their action. At the same time they must keep focus on the issue at hand without getting distracted by an external figure, other part of the opponent’s body, or even a coach. In future blogs I want to explore the specifics of the Stroop color word test and Go/No go tasks as they could potentially be a part of the design of my own study.