Table 1 Literature on the impact of physical exercise on perceptual-cognitive performances of athletes (n = 26)
From: Physical Load Affects Perceptual-Cognitive Performance of Skilled Athletes: a Systematic Review
Study (year) | Sport and Participants (n) | Exercise Load | Perceptual/Cognitive Task and Measurement | Testing Notes | Main Results | MMAT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Casanova et al. (2013) [26] | Soccer Players Experts: n = 8 M = 24.6 ± 3.9 Advanced: n = 8 M = 26.3 ± 2.9 | Specific treadmill, intermittent exercise protocol | Specific a computer-based, anticipation, accuracy | during exercise, no rest condition, counterbalanced order | Reduced accuracy under fatigue for both groups | **** |
Cereatti et al. (2009) [36] | Orienteers Advanced: n = 12 M = 15.9 ± 1.4 Novices: n = 12 M = 15.6 ± 1.8 | General cycle ergometer, moderate, 60 % HRR | General b computer-based, attentional task, Exp 1: focusing of attention at (para-) foveal locations Exp 2: peripheral visual space, RT, error rates | during exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Exp 1: both groups improved RT during PE, orienteers improved more Exp 2: both groups improved RT during PE, no difference between groups | *** |
Collardeau et al. (2001) [28] | Triathletes Experts: n = 11 M = 26.5 ± 4.8 | Specific treadmill, run at ventilatory threshold | General b computer-based, simple RT | before, during, after exercise, no counter-balanced order | Improvement in RT compared to rest after 40 min of PE, improvements from pre-exercise to after exercise | ** |
Davranche & Audiffren (2004) [37] | Decision-Making Sport Athletes (handball, basketball, tennis, soccer) Advanced: n = 16 M = 22.8 ± 2.5 | General low (20 %) and moderate (50 %) ind. Wmax,cycle ergometer | General b computer-based, choice RT task, speed, accuracy | during exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Improvements of RT (50 % compared to rest), no effect of PE on accuracy | **** |
Davranche et al. (2006) [38] | Decisional Sport Athletes (Team Sport Players) Advanced: n = 11 4 Female: M = 22 ± 2.0 7 Male: M = 25 ± 4.0 | General cycle ergometer, moderate, 90 % of ind. ventilatory threshold power | General b computer-based, choice RT task, mean RT, decision errors | during exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Faster RT during PE, no effect of PE on decision errors | *** |
Davranche et al. (2009) [39] | Kayakers Experts: n = 12 M = n.r. (14-35) | Specific Kayak ergometer, low (40 %) and moderate (75 %) ind. HRmax | General a computer-based, Simon task, accuracy, RT | during exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | No effect on accuracy, RT better at 75 % compared to 40 % | **** |
Delignières et al. (1994) [40] | Fencers Experts: n = 20 M = 24.0 ± 8.3 Novices: n = 20 M = 23.3 ± 5.5 | General cycle ergometer, low (20 %), moderate (40 %, 60 %), high (80 %) ind. Wmax | General b computer-based, 2- and 4-CRT tasks, speed, error rate | during exercise, rest condition, no counter-balanced order | Speed: | *** |
Experts: improvents as PE increased, Novices: deterioration as PE increased, Error Rate: no differences | ||||||
Elsworthy et al. (2014) [25] | Australian Football Players Experts: n = 29 M = 32.4 ± 6.1 | Specific intermittent real game analyses | Specific a decision-making, accuracy | during exercise, no rest condition, no counterbalanced order | No effect of PE on accuracy | **** |
Fontana et al. (2009) [44] | Soccer Players Advanced: n = 16 M = 21.1 ± 1.6 Novices: n = 16 M = 19.5 ± 1.1 | General treadmill, rest, low (40 %), moderate (60 %, 80 %) ind. VO2max | Specific a video clips, decision-making task, speed, accuracy | during exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Speed: improvements for both groups with increased PE intensity, PE does not affect accuracy | **** |
Hancock & McNaughton (1986)1[27] | Orienteers Advanced: n = 6 M = 27.0 ± 11 | Specific treadmill, moderate, ind. anaerobic threshold | Specific a computer-based, slides of orienteering checkpoints + questions, correct/incorrect answers | during exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | PE-condition (= fatigue): decrease of correct answers | * |
Hogervorst & Riedel (1996) [35] | Triathletes, Cyclists Advanced: n = 15 M = 24.9 ± 7.9 | Specific cycle ergometer, moderate, 75 % ind. Wmax | General a computer-based, simple and 3 CRT, Stroop task | after exercise, rest condition (before exercise), no counter- balanced order | Speed: improvements after exercise for simple and 3 CRT task, Stroop task | ** |
Huertas et al. (2011) [32] | Cyclists Advanced n = 18 M = 17.0 ± 2.0 | Specific cycle ergometer, moderate, 80 % and 90 % of lactate threshold | General a attentional task (including alerting, orienting, executive control), speed | after exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Improvements under PE (90 % better than 80 %, both better than at rest) | **** |
Hüttermann & Memmert (2014) [34] | Decisional Sport Athletes (Team Sport Players) Advanced: n = 8 M = 24.88 ± 3.27 Novices n = 8 M = 26.00 ± 4.27 | General cycle ergometer, moderate, 50 %, 60 %, 70 % HRmax | General b computer-based, attentional breadth task, accuracy | during exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Athletes: Improvements under PE, best results under 70 % HRmax Novices: Improvements under PE, bests results under 60 % HRmax | *** |
Larkin et al. (2014) [46] | Australian Football Players Expert umpires: n = 15 M = 36.0 ± 13.5 | Specific real games, high, competitive Australien football | Specific a video-based, decision-making, accuracy | post exercise, no rest condition, no counter-balanced order | Improvements in quarter 4 (compared to quarter 2 and 3) | **** |
Lemmink & Vjsscher (2005) [41] | Soccer Players Advanced: n = 16 M = 20.9 ± 2.0 | General cycle ergometer, intermittent exercise | General b computer based, multiple choice RT task, speed, accuracy | Group 1: post exercise Group 2: rest | No differences between the groups | *** |
Llorens et al. (2015) [33] | Triathletes Advanced: n = 14 Novices: n = 13 M = 24 ± 3.0 (of both groups) | Specific cycle ergometer, high, maximal incremental effort | General a computer based, spatial attention task, RT | after exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Improvements of RT for the advanced group under PE, No differences between the conditions for the novice group | **** |
McMorris & Graydon (1996) [45] | Soccer Players Advanced: n = 10 M = n.r. Novices: n = 10 M = n.r. | General cycle ergometer, rest, moderate (70 %), high (100 %) ind. Wmax | Specific b computer-based, decision-making task, accuracy, overall speed of decision, speed of decision for accurate responses | during exercise, rest condition, no counter-balanced order | Speed for accurate responses: improvements under PE, Overall speed: improvements only for advanced under PE, Accuracy: no effect of PE | *** |
McMorris & Graydon (1997) [20] | Soccer Players Exp 1: Advanced n = 12 M = 20.8 ± 1.34 Exp 2: Advanced n = 12 M = 20.8 ± 1.78 | General cycle ergometer, rest, moderate (70 %), high (100 %) ind. Wmax | Specific a+b detection task/visual search, Exp 1: low complexity- 2c, Exp 2: high complexity-4c, speed of search, speed of decision, accuracy | during exercise, rest condition, no counter-balanced order | Exp 1: speed: improvements during maximal exercise, accuracy: no effect Exp 2: speed: improvements during PE compared to rest, accuracy better at 100 % than at rest | *** |
Mouelhi Guizani et al. (2006) [42] | Fencers Experts: n = 12 M = 19.1 ± 2.99 Novices: n = 12 M = 20.82 ± 3.97 | General cycle ergometer, low (20 %), moderate (40 %, 60 %), high (80 %) ind. max. aerobic power | General b computer-based, simple and four choice RT task, RT, error rates | during exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Fencers: shorter CRTs at 40 %, 60 % and 80 % Pmaxcompared to rest-Novices: no effect of PE | **** |
Pesce & Audiffren (2011) [29] | Athletes from different Sports (Soccer Players, swimmers, gymnasts, rowers, orienteers, runners) Advanced: Young Athletes: n = 53, M = n.r. (16-24) Older Athletes: n = 47 M = n.r. (65-74) | General cycle ergometer, moderate, 60 % HRR | General a+b computer-based, two reaction-time tasks (low and high cognitive demands), RT | during exercise, rest condition counterbalanced order | Low demanding task: no effects of PE, High demanding task:improvements under PE for all participants | *** |
Pesce et al. (2007a) [19] | Orienteers Experts: n = 12 M = 66.2 ± 4.7 Novices n=13 M = 66.3 ± 4.6 | General cycle ergometer, moderate, 60 % HRR | General a+b computer-based, visual attention, Exp 1: low demands, Exp 2: high demands, RT, error rates | during exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Accuracy and speed not influenced by PE for both groups and in both experiments | **** |
Pesce et al. (2007b) [43] | Soccer Players Experts: n = 24 M = 17.8 ± 0.8 Novices: n = 24 M = n.r., same age range | General cycle ergometiter, moderate, 60 % HRR | General a+b computer-based, visual attention, Exp 1: low demands, Exp 2: high demands, RT, error rates | during exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Error rates: no effects on error rates in both Experiments Speed: Exp 1: no influence of PE on soccer players, improvements under PE for non-athletes, Exp 2: both groups: improvements under PE | **** |
Pesce et al. (2011) [30] | Cyclists Advanced: n = 16 Other endurance athletes: n = 16 Novices: n = 16 M = n.r. (60-80) | Specific cycle ergometer, moderate, 60%HRR | General b computer-based, visual attention, RT | during exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Athletes faster under PE, no influence of PE on novices | **** |
Royal et al. (2006) [47] | Water Polo Players Experts: n = 14 M = 17.2 ± 0.5 | Specific high, 4 sets of 8 repetitions of an 18 s max specific drill, progressively declining rest ratios (80-40-20-10s) | Specific a video-based, decision-making test, accuracy | after exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Set 4 accuracy better than at the set 3,2,1 (but not sign higher than pre-exercise) | **** |
Tsorbatzoudis et al. (1998) [31] | Cyclists Experts: n = 12 Novices: n = 46 3 exercise groups (A,B,C): n = 12 in each group, 2 control groups, n=11, A + B: untrained students, C: cyclists, control group B + C | Specific cycle ergometer, A: high intensity exercise for 5 min, heart rate at 180-190 bpm, B + C: moderate intensity exercise for 30 min, heart rate 150-160 bpm | General b computer-based, simple RT task, Vienna Test System, RT | after exercise, rest condition, no counter-balanced order | All groups improved their RT in both tests after PE | *** |
Vickers & Williams (2007) [23] | Biathletes Experts: n = 10 M = n.r. (16-24) | General cycle ergometer, moderate (55 %, 70 %), high (85 %,100 %) ind. VO2max | Specific b biathlon shooting, visual attention, accuracy, gaze behavior - duration of quiet eye (QE) | after exercise, rest condition, counterbalanced order | Highest level of accuracy during 55 %, declined thereafter to the lowest level at 100 %, QE duration longer on hits than misses for 55 %, 70 %, 85 %; during 100 % it declined to half | **** |