Comparison of whole-body sensorimotor skill learning between strength athletes, endurance athletes and healthy sedentary adults

Abstract

Motor sequences represent an integral part of human motor ability. Apart from simple movement sequences, complex coordinated movement sequences are the building blocks for peak athletic performance. Accordingly, optimized temporal and spatial coordination of muscle action across multiple limbs may be a distinguishing feature between athletes and non-athletes in many sports. In the present study, we aimed to assess differences between strength and endurance athletes and non-athletes during learning of a complex whole-body serial reaction time task (CWB-SRTT). For this purpose, 26 nonathletes (NAG) and 25 athletes (AG) learned the CWB-SRTT over 2 days separated by 7 days. Mean response times of participants were recorded and statistically analyzed for sequence-specific and non-sequence-specific improvements, as well as differences in learning rates and retention. Furthermore, AG was subdivided into strength (SG) and endurance (EG) athletes, and all analysis steps were repeated. Our results show a better mean response time of AG compared to NAG. However, we could not detect differences in sequence-specific or non-sequence-specific learning, as well as different retention rates between NAG and AG or SG and EG. We assume here that a potential lack of motor transfer between general athletic abilities and the specific complex motor sequence mainly accounts for our findings.

Whole-body sensorimotor skill learning in football players: No evidence for motor transfer effects

“…Both groups improved their movement times and reaction times during CWB-SRTT on day 1 and day 2. This is in line with previous findings for simple SRTT paradigms (Moisello et al, 2009) [ 8 ] as well as for CWB-SRTT (Maudrich et al, 2021) [ 11 ]. Similar to our study comparing strength and endurance athletes to healthy controls during CWB-SRTT, we did not detect significant differences in sequence-specific improvements when comparing movement times and reaction times between both groups on either day.…”

“…In this study, a four-directional CWB-SRTT for the lower extremities was used as a model of whole-body sensorimotor skill learning. The CWB-SRTT has been shown to robustly induce motor learning in two of our previous experiments [ 10 , 11 ]. The main aspects of CWB-SRTT are illustrated in Fig 1 , as well as briefly described below.…”

“…Initial evidence demonstrated that the brains of non-athletes functionally reorganize during learning of CWB-SRTT [ 10 ]. A subsequent study examined baseline differences in initial performance during CWB-SRTT as well as learning rates between athletes (endurance and strength athletes) and non-athletes during two days of CWB-SRTT training [ 11 ]. The results of this study did not show any differences in initial performance or learning rates between athletes and non-athletes.…”

Complex sequential learning is not facilitated by transcranial direct current stimulation over DLPFC or M1

“…A detailed description of the four‐directional CWB‐SRTT can be found in previous publications of our group (Maudrich et al, 2021; Mizuguchi et al, 2019). In brief, the participants stood on two centre plates, which were surrounded by a four‐directional plate array.…”

“…Furthermore, our CWB-SRTT setting allowed RT differentiation into reaction and movement time. Reaction time (ReT) was the main outcome parameter previous studies found to be associated with CWB-SRTT learning (Maudrich et al, 2021;Mizuguchi et al, 2019).…”