Perceptual & Motor Skills: Learning & Memory 2014, 119, 1, 123-132. © Perceptual & Motor Skills 2014
STUDY OF REACTION TIME TO VISUAL STIMULI IN ATHLETES WITH AND WITHOUT A HEARING IMPAIRMENT1 JAVIER SOTO-REY, JAVIER PÉREZ-TEJERO, AND JESÚS J. ROJO-GONZÁLEZ Centre for Inclusive Sports Studies Faculty of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences Polytechnic University of Madrid, Spain RAÚL REINA Sport Research Centre, Miguel Hernández University, Elche, Spain Summary.—This study analyzes the differences in manual reaction time (RT) to visual stimuli in two samples of physically active persons: a group of athletes without hearing impairment (n = 79; M age = 22.6 yr., SD = 3.7) and a group of athletes with hearing impairment (n = 44, M age = 25.6 yr., SD = 5.0). Reaction time (RT) was measured and then differences between both groups were assessed by sex, type of sport (individual vs team sports), and competition level. RT to visual stimuli was significantly shorter for athletes with hearing impairment than for those without hearing impairment, with a significant sex difference (shorter RT for males), but no differences regarding type of sport or competition level. Suggestions for further research and sport applications are provided.
It is known that reaction time (RT) is an important component of sports performance (Fernández, 2010). Many authors in the literature have defined RT with only small differences among these definitions (Woodworth & Scholosberg, 1954; Clarke & Glines, 1962; Karpovitch, 1966; Bernia, 1981), explaining the RT as the elapsed time between the onset of one stimulus and the initiation of the motor response (Martínez, 2003; Reina, Moreno, Sanz, Damas, & Luis, 2006; Reina, Moreno, & Sanz, 2007; Campo, 2008). These authors explain RT as a component of motor response, which includes RT, movement time, and response time. A variety of factors has been found to influence RT, including those which depend on the personal or intrinsic factors and those related to the stimulus or extrinsic factors. Intrinsic factors include physical state, warm-up, fatigue, motivation, the body limb or part responsible for the response, and other characteristics such as age, sex, ingested substances (such as caffeine or drugs), and neurological factors such as the receiver organ, the length of the sensory pathway, the type of axons, or the number of synapses (Guyton & Hall, 2011). The brain needs a minimum of 60–70 msec. for capturing the visual stimuAddress correspondence to Javier Soto-Rey, Centre for Inclusive Sports Studies (CEDI), Facultad de Ciencias de la Actividad Física y del Deporte – INEF, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, C/ Martín Fierro 7, 28040 Madrid, Spain or e-mail (
[email protected]). 1
DOI 10.2466/22.15.PMS.119c18z9
11-PMS_SotoRey_130097.indd 123
ISSN 0031-5125
05/08/14 9:55 AM
124
J. SOTO-REY, ET AL.
lus, interpretation, and planning a response, which together comprise the total RT. Among the extrinsic factors are the physical characteristics of the stimulus, starting position, mode of transmission of the stimulus, stimulus intensity, foreperiod (Henry & Rogers, 1960; Roca, 1983), the complexity of the required movement, and the influence of the color of the stimulus. In sports practice, intrinsic and extrinsic factors interact to result in a more appropriate response. Both the type of sport (individual or team) and the sports level achieved have been found to influence RT (Henry & Rogers, 1960; Sage, 1977; Roca, 1983). In relation to the segmental location of the motor response, RT can be classified into “body reaction time” (shorter limb or other body part) or “manual reaction time” (hands); while depending on the number of alternatives or possible stimulus-responses, it can be classified as “simple reaction time” and, if more than one stimulus is given, “multiple reaction time” (Schmidt & Lee, 1999). During sports practice, the importance of a fast response to a given stimulus is crucial. In a large number of sports, those athletes with a shorter simple RT to a given stimulus have an advantage (Henry, 1952), so RT is a component of speed (Fernández, 2010). Some studies have found that persons with sensory impairments compensate with further development of other sensory pathways (compensation mechanisms), as in the case of persons with hearing impairment (Álvarez, 2004; Pérez-Tejero, Soto-Rey, & Rojo-González, 2011). Simple RT to an auditory stimulus is related to its loudness (Wagner, Florentine, Buus, & McCormack, 2004), and so influences auditory RT for persons with hearing impairment. Several studies seem to show that persons with hearing impairment have greater visual acuity than those with normal hearing (BorodulinNadzieja, Thannhäuser, Buldanczyk, & Jurecka, 1999; Sladen, Tharpe, Ashmead, & Grantham, 2005; Gkouvatzi, Mantis, & Kambas, 2010). Codina, Buckley, Port, and Pascalis (2011) found longer RT to light stimuli in peripheral vision in samples of children ages 5 to 10 yr. and 13 to 15 yr. compared to same-age children without hearing impairment. However, in the same study, RTs in 11- and 12-yr.-old children with and without hearing impairment were not significantly different. No studies were found that distinguished visual RT between athletes with and without hearing impairment. For all the above-mentioned issues, this study analyzed the differences in RT to a visual stimulus in a group of athletes with hearing impairment and a group of physically active Sport Sciences students without hearing impairment. Hypothesis. Simple visual RT will be faster in the group of athletes with hearing impairment.
11-PMS_SotoRey_130097.indd 124
05/08/14 9:55 AM
VISUAL RT, HEARING IMPAIRMENT
125
METHOD Sample The study involved 79 volunteers without hearing impairment (nonHI group), all students of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences at the Polytechnic University of Madrid, ages 18 to 35 yr. (M = 22.6 yr., SD = 3.7; 59 men, 20 women), and 44 athletes with hearing impairment (HI group), volunteers from the Madrid Federation of Sports for the Deaf (FMDS) and the Spanish Federation of Sports for the Deaf (FEDS), ages 16 to 36 yr. (M = 25.6 yr., SD = 5.0; 27 men, 17 women). Athletes with hearing impairment fulfilled the ICSD criteria to compete: (a) hearing loss of a minimum of 55 dB in the better ear2 and (b) being active members of the FMDS and FEDS, competing at the national level at the time of the study. They were all healthy, had sufficient sleep, and did not take substances that might alter RT (stimulants or depressants). The sample comprised those who volunteered after dissemination of information about the research project at the Sport Sciences Faculty information points (for recruiting athletes with normal hearing) and also at a national sporting event for athletes with hearing impairment. The goal of the study was explained to all participants in advance, and a written consent form was collected from all who agreed to carry out the tests and participate in the study. Before the beginning of the study, written informed consent was obtained from all the guardians of the participant children. At any time during the research, an option was given to withdraw from the testing. The study was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki on research with human beings. Materials A record sheet designed for the purpose of collecting data from each participant was used to record sex, age, sports practiced, competitive sport, length of time competing in the given sport, medication being taken at data collection time, consumption of an energy drink or any other substance that could alter RT, and the number of hours of sleep in the prior 24 hours. RT performance was also recorded on the same sheet. To measure RT, “SuperLab Pro”® software was used (Version 2), which allows researchers to design their own RT task. This instrument records times for all of the trials and also allows the predetermination of time between trials (rest time), inter-trial interval, and instructions based on the researchers' interests. According to the manufacturer's manual (SuperLab Pro, 2008), the reliability of the keyboard has a standard deviation of 0.033 sec. The program was run on a laptop ASUS Eee PC 1005 with a By ICSD definition: moderate hearing loss (40–60 dB), severe hearing loss (60–80 dB), and profound hearing loss (80 dB or greater) (Kurková, Válková, & Scheetz, 2011). 2
11-PMS_SotoRey_130097.indd 125
05/08/14 9:55 AM
126
J. SOTO-REY, ET AL.
10.1 inch display (1024 × 600 pixels, 60 Hz refresh), recording the time taken by the person to respond to each of the stimuli, which was then exported and stored in a spreadsheet, creating a visual simple RT data sheet recorded and exported in real time. Task and Procedure The experimental setting was designed to enhance comfort and quietness during the tests. Each person was placed in a sitting position in front of a table with the computer screen (about 40 cm away) and the keyboard at a distance of 30 cm. Each person performed the entire measurement process in a single session. Before starting the experiment, every participant received information about the purpose of the study and instructions on the simple RT task to be performed. Although the instructions for performing the test appeared in writing on the computer screen, the researchers explained how to proceed before the beginning of the experiment, emphasizing that responses to the stimuli should be as fast as possible after onset. After completing the registration form, the participants performed a preliminary test trial of one set of six visual stimuli to familiarize themselves with the protocol, ensuring that the explanation had been understood. Visual stimuli were provided using the software. A green circle of 5.5 cm diameter appeared on a white background. Intervals between 800 and 2500 msec. from offset to onset were set between each stimulus using the software, and six different series of trials using these criteria were designed. One given set was randomly assigned to every participant (Thomas, Nelson, & Silverman, 2007) using the software. This number of trials for each participant was used to avoid familiarization with the task, preventing anticipation responses, as in Gursoy (2010). The participant had to respond to the green visual stimulus as soon as it appeared on the white background. The motor response consisted in pressing the “b” key on the computer keyboard with the index finger of the dominant hand. The hand was previously placed on the keyboard, to avoid variations in movements or identification of the key. Because the RT can vary depending on whether the stimulus occurs at the point of sight fixation or away from this point, it was decided that all visual stimuli designed in the experiment should be placed at the same distance, so all of them appeared in the center of the screen. During data collection, the placement of the experimenter and other details were carefully organized to avoid anticipation or loss of attention. The researcher stood behind the apparatus and the participant, out of sight at all times and making sure that there was no ambient noise in the experimental context. Every trial and RT performed in each of them were recorded automatically by the software.
11-PMS_SotoRey_130097.indd 126
05/08/14 9:55 AM
127
VISUAL RT, HEARING IMPAIRMENT
Analysis The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was applied to analyze the distribution of data and its normality. The test showed normal results for each of the variables analyzed, so parametric statistics were applied. The mean for visual RT was obtained from the trimmed data for each person, i.e., after the responses with minimum and maximum RT were eliminated from the six data for each individual, leaving four RTs for further analysis. In this way errors due to fatigue, forgetfulness, or anticipation were avoided. Data were obtained for the visual RT with the following factors: hearing impairment or not, sex, type of sport (individual or team sports), and competitive level (if the person competed or not). Factorial ANOVA was used to evaluate differences between groups on RT for the previous factors and its interaction. Effect sizes (Cohen's d) above 0.8, between 0.8 and 0.5, between 0.5 and 0.2, and lower than 0.2 were considered as large, moderate, small, and trivial, respectively. Statistical analyses were conducted by SPSS (Version 18.0; SPSS, Inc. Chicago, IL), and alpha level was set at p < .05. RESULTS Table 1 shows descriptive statistical results of RT for each of the factors studied. Three of the 79 participants without hearing impairment and five of the 44 with a hearing impairment did not answer the question related with “sport practiced regularly,” so those participants were not included in the factorial ANOVA model. Table 2 shows group comparison and interactions among factors sex, type of sport, and competition (planned comparison for group in the 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 factorial ANOVA). The corrected model from the factorial ANOVA showed significant group differences (F14, 110 = 4.18, p < .001, d = 1.00). According to Table 1, no significant interactions were obtained, but the interactions group × type of sport and group × sex × competition had small effect sizes. Following up the interaction group × type of sport, the scores TABLE 1 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICAL RESULTS (MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS) FOR REACTION TIME (MSEC.) Variable Sex Type of sport Competition level
11-PMS_SotoRey_130097.indd 127
Level
Athletes With Hearing Impairment
Comparison Group Without Hearing Impairment
n
M
SD
n
M
Male
25
247
60
57
311
SD 61
Female
14
270
48
19
357
68
Individual
19
236
32
27
331
73
Team
20
273
68
49
319
61
Yes
27
259
63
52
316
65
No
12
247
36
24
338
65
05/08/14 9:55 AM
128
J. SOTO-REY, ET AL. TABLE 2 PLANNED COMPARISONS FOR GROUP AND INTERACTIONS IN FACTORIAL ANOVA SS
F1, 114
p
Cohen's d
Group (G)
.075
21.27
< .001
1.00
G × Sex (S)
.001
0.14
.71
.07
G × Type of sport (T)
.012
3.33
.07
.44
IS, TS HI < IS, TS NHI
G × Competition level (C)
.002
0.01
.94
.01
C, NC HI < C, NC NHI
G×S×T
.004
1.11
.30
.18
See text
Source
Post hoc HI < NHI ♂ ♀ HI < ♂ ♀ NHI
G×S×C .012 3.45 .07 .45 See text Note.—HI = Hearing impaired; NHI = non-Hearing impaired. Other factors are Sex (S: ♂ = men; ♀ = women); Type of sport (T: IS = individual; TS = team); Competition level (C = competes; NC = does not compete).
of the non-HI group were not significantly different for athletes in individual sports and team sports. In contrast, the HI group showed significant differences for type of sport (F38 = 4.72, p = .04), participants in individual sports having significantly shorter RT than those in team sports. Nevertheless, participants with hearing impairment (255 ± 56 msec.) responded faster than participants without hearing impairment (323 ± 66 msec.). Following up the interaction of sex × competition, significant differences were obtained for sex (F1 ,114 = 9.36, p = .003, d = 0.86), with faster reaction responses by men than women. Also, a significant interaction was obtained for factors sex × type of sport × competition (F1, 114 = 6.04, p = .02, d = 0.68). Similar than previous results, the HI group reported faster RT than the other group. In the case of men, athletes that compete had faster RT (HI group: individual sport 218 ± 8 msec., team sport 267 ± 74 msec. < non-HI group: individual sport 287 ± 52 msec., team sport 313 ± 61 msec.) than those that did not compete (HI group: individual sport 226 ± 15 msec., team sport 227 msec. < non-HI group: individual sport 369 ± 69 msec., team sport 300 ± 55 msec.). On the other hand, women that compete regularly also performed faster RT (HI group: individual sport 221 ± 19 msec., team sport = 302 ± 47 msec. < non-HI group: individual sport 368 ± 105 msec., team sport 348 ± 41 msec.) than those that did not compete (HI group: individual sport 262 ± 41 msec. < non-HI group: individual sport 339 ± 58 msec.). No comparison was obtained for women who do not compete regularly in team sports, because there were no cases for women with hearing impairment. DISCUSSION Visual perception is a key component in persons with hearing impairment, and especially in sports events. Possible differences in visual RT may influence the outcomes in sports where RT is a main component of performance. To the authors' knowledge, a simple choice visual RT evalu-
11-PMS_SotoRey_130097.indd 128
05/08/14 9:55 AM
VISUAL RT, HEARING IMPAIRMENT
129
ation in both a group of athletes with hearing impairment and a comparison group with sports experience has not been studied. This study supports the expected faster RT for visual stimuli in athletes with hearing impairment and its interaction with other factors as sex, type of sport, and involvement in competition. Sex is one of the factors that seems to influence visual RT performance (Roca, 1983; Schmidt & Lee, 1999; Gursoy, 2010). In the current study, sex differences were statistically significant, with shorter RT in men than women. These results are in line with similar findings from Henry and Rogers (1960) with male and female adolescents. Similarly, Duarte, Costa, and Moura (2003) and Gursoy (2010) found sex differences in visual RT, with the differences tending toward shorter RT for men regardless of age, in a sample without hearing impairment. Regarding the group of athletes with hearing impairment, results were similar to those obtained by Borodulin-Nadzieja, et al. (1999). Moreover, regarding the evaluation of sex differences according to group with or without hearing impairment, significant differences were found for men and for women, finding a shorter RT for athletes with hearing impairment for both sexes. When visual RT was examined by type of sport practiced, there was no consensus in the literature in relation to RT according to individual versus team sport (Alves, 1985; Tavares, 1993; Duarte, et al., 2003). In the current study, the HI subgroup in individual sports showed faster RT than those in team sports, but these differences were only found among athletes who competed regularly. So, competition could be a factor to consider if the type of sport influences RT. The type of stimuli reacted to in individual sports (e.g., swimming or athletics) are similar to the stimulus used in this study (Moreno, Saavedra, Sabido, Luis, & Reina, 2006). Team sports require reactions against several stimuli, and choice or selection RT paradigms are more similar to this reality (Roca, 1983; Nougier, Stein, & Azemar, 1990; Duarte, et al., 2003). Roca (1983), Alves (1985), and Tavares (1993) allow plausible assumptions about the relative importance of RT in sport, indicating that visual skills could be trainable and could improve visual system performance and be transferred to athletic competition. Fontani, Lodi, Felici, Migliorini, and Corradeschi (2006) found significant differences for visual RT between two groups of karatekas (high experience and low experience groups), with faster RT for those with high experience, but results differed when they studied other types of RT or types of sports (e.g., volleyball). Inferences about the influence of sport practice on (visual) RT performance should be treated with caution, as cross-sectional methodological designs can only suggest possible causality.
11-PMS_SotoRey_130097.indd 129
05/08/14 9:55 AM
130
J. SOTO-REY, ET AL.
There are many sports in which RT plays an important role, so that a negligible decrease in RT can make a great difference in achieving the desired goal. Athletes with hearing impairment may have an advantage in visual RT. For this reason, further study is necessary in which perceptionaction coupling is tested in a more ecologically valid setting (Williams, Ward, Knowles, & Smeeton, 2002) such as, e.g., the development and evaluation of starting systems in athletics with visual stimuli instead (or at the same time) of sound stimuli for athletes with hearing impairment. REFERENCES
ÁLVAREZ, D. (2004) La sordoceguera, un análisis multidisciplinar [Deaf-blindness, a multidisciplinary analysis]. Madrid, Spain: ONCE. ALVES, J. A. (1985) Relação entre o Tempo de Reacção Simples, de Escolha e de decisão e o Tipo de Desporto Praticado (Individual e Colectivo) [Relationship between the Simple Reaction Time, Choice and Decision and type Practiced Sports (Individual and Collective)]. Unpublished monograph, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa. Lisboa, Portugal: Faculdade de Motricidade Humana. BERNIA, J. (1981) Tiempo de reacción y procesos psicológicos [Reaction time and psychological processes]. Valencia, Spain: Nau Llibres. BORODULIN-NADZIEJA, L., THANNHÄUSER, J., BULDANCZYK, A., & JURECKA, M. (1999) Simple and differential reactions times in children with hearing sense disorders who grow up and develop in various environmental conditions. Journal of Human Kinetics, 21(2), 79-94. CAMPO, V. L. (2008) Influencia del entrenamiento perceptivo, basado en la anticipación, sobre el comportamiento visual y la respuesta de reacción aplicado al tenis [Influence of perceptual training, based on the anticipation on the visual behavior and response reaction applied to tennis]. Cáceres, Spain: Universidad Extremadura. CLARKE, H. H., & GLINES, D. (1962) Relationships of reaction, movement, and completion times to motor, strength, anthropometric, and maturity measures of 13-year-old boys. Research Quarterly, 33, 194-201. CODINA, C., BUCKLEY, D., PORT, M., & PASCALIS, O. (2011) Deaf and hearing children: a comparison of peripheral vision development. Developmental Science, 14(4), 725-737. DUARTE, A. M., COSTA, C., & MOURA, J. A. (2003) Tiempo de reacción en individuos, practicantes y no practicantes de actividad deportiva [Reaction time in individuals, practitioners and non-practitioners of sport]. Integración: Revista sobre ceguera y deficiencia visual, 41, 7-14. FERNÁNDEZ, O. (2010) Historias de los tiempos de reacción [Histories about reaction times]. Atletismo Español, 635, 60-61. FONTANI, G., LODI, L., FELICI, A., MIGLIORINI, S., & CORRADESCHI, F. (2006) Attention in athletes of high and low experience engaged in different open skill sports. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 102(3), 791-805. GKOUVATZI, A. N., MANTIS, K., & KAMBAS, A. (2010) Comparative study of motor performance of deaf and hard of hearing students in reaction time, visual-motor control and upper limb speed and dexterity abilities. International Journal of Special Education, 2(25), 15-25. GURSOY, R. (2010) Sex differences in relations of muscle power, lung function, and reaction time in athletes. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 110(3), 714-720.
11-PMS_SotoRey_130097.indd 130
05/08/14 9:55 AM
VISUAL RT, HEARING IMPAIRMENT
131
GUYTON, A. C., & HALL, P. E. (2011) Textbook of medical physiology. (12th ed.) Philadelphia, PA: Saunders/Elsevier. HENRY, F. M., & ROGERS, D. E. (1960) Increased response latency for complicated movements and a “memory drum” theory of neuromotor reaction. Research Quarterly, 31, 448-458. HENRY, F. M. (1952) Independence of reaction and movement times and equivalence of sensory motivators of faster response. Research Quarterly, 23, 43-53. KARPOVITCH, P. V. (1966) Psychology of muscular activity. (6th ed.) London, UK: W. B. Saunders. KURKOVÁ, P., VÁLKOVÁ, H., & SCHEETZ, N. (2011) Factors impacting participation of European elite deaf athletes in sport. Journal of Sports Sciences, 29(6), 607-618. MARTÍNEZ, O. (2003) El tiempo de reacción visual en el kárate [Visual reaction time in karate]. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. Madrid, Spain: Escuela Técnica Superior Arquitectura. MORENO, F. J., SAAVEDRA, J. M., SABIDO, R., LUIS, V., & REINA, R. (2006) Visual search strategies of experienced and nonexperienced swimming coaches. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 103(3), 861-872. NOUGIER, V., STEIN, J. F., & AZEMAR, G. (1990) Covert orienting of attention and motor preparation processes as a factor success in fencing. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 19, 251-272. PÉREZ-TEJERO, J., SOTO-REY, J., & ROJO-GONZÁLEZ, J. J. (2011) Estudio del tiempo de reacción ante estímulos sonoros y visuales [Study of reaction time to visual and auditory stimuli]. Motricidad: European Journal of Human Movement, 27, 149-162. REINA, R., MORENO, F. J., & SANZ, D. (2007) Visual behavior and motor responses of novice and experienced wheelchair tennis players relative to the service return. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 24, 254-271. REINA, R., MORENO, F. J., SANZ, D., DAMAS, J. S., & LUIS, V. (2006) El efecto de la dimensionalidad de la escena en el comportamiento visual y motor durante el resto al servicio en tenis y tenis en silla de ruedas [The effect of the dimensionality of visual and motor behavior during the remainder serve in tennis and wheelchair tennis]. Motricidad: European Journal of Human Movement, 16, 63-84. ROCA, J. (1983) Tiempo de reacción y deporte [Reaction time and sport]. Barcelona, Spain: INEFC. SCHMIDT, R. A., & LEE, T. D. (1999) Motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. SAGE, G. H. (1977) Introduction to motor behavior: a neuropsychological approach. (2nd ed.) Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. SLADEN, D. P., THARPE, A. M., ASHMEAD, D. H., & GRANTHAM, D. W. (2005) Visual attention in deaf and normal hearing adults: effects of stimulus compatibility. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 1529-1537. SUPERLAB PRO. (2008) SuperLab manual. Retrieved May 25, 2011, from http://www.super lab.com/manual/superlab-manual.pdf. TAVARES, F. (1993) A capacidade de decisão táctica no jogo de basquetebol [The capacity tactical decision on the game of basketball]. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Universidade do Porto. Porto, Portugal: Faculdade de Ciências do Desporto e de Educação Física. THOMAS, J. R., NELSON, J. K., & SILVERMAN, S. J. (2007) Research methods in physical activity. (5th ed.) Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
11-PMS_SotoRey_130097.indd 131
05/08/14 9:55 AM
132
J. SOTO-REY, ET AL.
WAGNER, E., FLORENTINE, M., BUUS, S., & MCCORMACK, J. (2004) Spectral loudness summation and simple reaction time. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116(3), 1681-1686. WILLIAMS, A. M., WARD, P., KNOWLES, J. M., & SMEETON, N. (2002) Perceptual skill in realworld tasks: training, instruction, and transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 259-270. WOODWORTH, R. S., & SCHOLOSBERG, H. (1954) Experimental psychology. New York: Holt. Accepted July 7, 2014.
11-PMS_SotoRey_130097.indd 132
05/08/14 9:55 AM
