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

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.

Automated summary

This study investigated the effect of different sport environments on proactive and reactive inhibitory processes. Tennis players, swimmers, and non-athletes were compared in Go/No-Go and Stop Signal Task. The results showed that athletes performed better in reactive inhibitory control, while non-athletes performed relatively better in cued inhibitory tasks. Athletes exhibited a higher proportion of non-one-shot movements during inhibitory failures. The study also found a higher proportion of non-one-shot movements in cued inhibitory tasks.