4.4 Article

GENDER INFLUENCE ON RESPONSE TIME TO SENSORY STIMULI

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181c7c536

关键词

motor behavior; agility; quickness; reaction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spierer, DK, Petersen, RA, Duffy, K, Corcoran, BM, and Rawls-Martin, T. Gender influence on response time to sensory stimuli. J Strength Cond Res 24(4): 957-963, 2010-The purpose of this investigation was to examine the effect of auditory stimuli (AS) and visual stimuli (VS) on response time, speed, and distance in male and female college athletes. Thirty-five healthy National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I men's soccer and women's lacrosse athletes (mean age 20.7 +/- 2.3 years) participated in the study. This experiment was conducted in a laboratory environment, using a Cybex Reactor a 14-sensor force plate device used to detect response times, speed, and distance. Subjects stood on the start sensor and were instructed at the prompt (auditory: a prerecorded go command, visual: an illuminated circle on a television monitor) to run through the end sensor without braking. Three trials of each condition were performed by each subject. Movement time, speed, and distance were recorded for each trial. General linear model repeated measure analyses and post hoc 1-way analysis of variance were conducted on all dependent variables (p <= 0.05). Movement time was significantly faster in men compared with women under AS (p = 0.008) and VS (p < 0.05) conditions. A trend toward a faster transit time was noted in men in the AS condition (p = 0.072), but transit time was faster in men in the VS condition (p < 0.001). Transit speed (distance covered) was faster in men in response to AS (p < 0.05) and VS (p < 0.001). Male athletes respond faster as compared with female athletes, and cover greater distance when presented with VSs as compared to ASs. Data suggest that performance in male athletes related to response times, speed, and distance may be enhanced with the use of visual cueing or VSs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据