Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation

Journal of Human Kinetics

The Journal of Academy of Physical Education in Katowice

4 Issues per year

Increased IMPACT FACTOR 2012: 0.458
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.488

Open Access
VolumeIssuePage

Open Access

Speed of Visual Sensorimotor Processes and Conductivity of Visual Pathway in Volleyball Players

Teresa Zwierko1 / Wieslaw Osinski1 / Wojciech Lubinski1 / Damian Czepita1 / Beata Florkiewicz1

Institute of Physical Culture, University of Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland1

Department of Theory of Physical Education and Anthropomotoric, Academy of Physical Education, Poznan, Poland2

Department of Ophthalmology, Pomeranian Medical Academy, Szczecin, Poland3

This content is open access.

Citation Information: Journal of Human Kinetics. Volume 23, Issue , Pages 21–27, ISSN (Online) 1899-7562, ISSN (Print) 1640-5544, DOI: 10.2478/v10078-010-0003-8, May 2010

Publication History

Published Online:
2010-05-24

Speed of Visual Sensorimotor Processes and Conductivity of Visual Pathway in Volleyball Players

Volleyball is a dynamic game which requires a high level of visual skills. The first aim of this study was to investigate the several aspects of reaction times (RT) to visual stimuli in volleyball players (12) compared to non-athletic subjects (12). By using the tests included in the Vienna Test System (Schuhfried, Austria), simple reaction time (SRT), choice reaction time (CRT) and peripheral reaction time (PRT) were examined. The second aim of this study was to assess the neurophysiological basis of early visual sensory processing in both examined groups. We measured two sets of pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials (VEPs) during monocular central field stimulation (Reti Scan, Roland Consult, Germany). The latencies of waves N75, P100 and N135 were determined. We observed significantly shorter (p<0.05) total reaction time to stimuli appearing in the central and peripheral field of vision in the volleyball players compared to non-athletes. With regard to SRT and CRT the main differences between the groups appeared in pre-motor reaction times. Volleyball players had shorter VEPs P100 wave latencies (p<0.05) than the non-athlete group. The results indicate faster signal transmission in visual pathways in athletes than in non-athletes. This fact can be attributed to the effect of rapid visual-activity-demanding sports on the central nervous system.

Keywords: reaction time; visual evoked potentials; volleyball

  • Allison T., Wood C. C., Goff W. R. Brain stem auditory, pattern-reversal visual, and short-latency somatosensory evoked potentials: latencies in relation to age, sex, and brain and body size. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol, 1983. 55: 619-36 [PubMed] [CrossRef]

  • Ando S., Kida N., Oda S. Central and peripheral visual reaction time of soccer players and nonathletes. Percept Mot Skills, 2001. 92 (3): 786-794 [PubMed]

  • Bhanot J. L., Sindu L. S. Comparative study of reaction time in Indian sportsmen specializing in hockey, volleyball, weightlifting and gymnastics. J Sports Med Phys Fitness, 1980. 20:113-118

  • Borysiuk Z., Waśkiewicz Z. Information processes, stimulation and perceptual training in fencing. Journal of Human Kinetics, 2008. 19: 63-82

  • Botwinick J., Thompson L. W. Premotor and motor components of reaction time. J Exp Psychol, 1966. 71(1): 9-15 [PubMed] [CrossRef]

  • Christenson G. N., Winkelstein A. M. Visual skills of athletes versus nonathletes: development of a sports vision testing battery. J Am Optom Assoc, 1988. 59(9): 666-75 [PubMed]

  • Colak T., Bamac B., Ozbek A., Bamac Y. S. Nerve conduction studies of upper extremities in tennis players. Br J Sports Med, 2004. 38(5): 632-635 [CrossRef] [PubMed]

  • Delpont E., Dolisi C., Suisse G., Bodino G., Gastaud M. Visual evoked potentials: differences related to physical activity. Int J Sports Med, 1991. 12(3): 293-8 [CrossRef] [PubMed]

  • Doğan B. Multiple-choice reaction and visual perception in female and male elite athletes. J Sports Med Phys Fitness, 2009. 49(1): 91-96

  • Endo H., Kato Y., Kizuka T., Takeda T. A comparison of stimulus synchronous activity in the primary motor cortices of athletes and nonathletes. Exp Brain Res, 2006. 174: 426-434 [CrossRef]

  • Enns J., Richards J. Visual attentional orienting in developing hockey players. J Exp Child Psychol, 1997. 23: 303-310

  • Erickson G. Sports vision: vision care for the enhancement of sports performance. St. Louis, Mo.: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2007.

  • Fontani G., Maffei D., Cameli S., Polidori F. Reactivity and event-related potentials during attentional tests in athletes. Eur J Appl Physiol, 1999. 80: 308-317 [CrossRef]

  • Halliday A. M. The visual evoked potentials in healthy subjects. In: Evoked potentials in clinic testing (ed. Halliday A. M.). Churchill Livingstone, 1993.

  • Harbin G., Durst L., Harbin D. Evaluation of oculomotor response in relationship to sports performance. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc, 1987. 21(3): 258-262

  • Helsen W. F., Starkes J. L. A multidimensional approach to skilled perception and performance in sport. App Cognit Psychol, 1999. 13: 1-27 [CrossRef]

  • Hoyle R. J., Holt L. E. Comparison of athletes and nonathletes on selected neuromuscular tests. Aust J Sport Sci, 1983. 3(1):13-18

  • Jafarzadehpur E., Aazami N., Bolouri B. Comparison of saccadic eye movements and facility of ocular accommodation in female volleyball players and non-players. Scand J Med Sci Sports, 2007. 17 (2): 186-190 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Web of Science]

  • Jasper H. The ten twenty electrode system of the international federation. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol, 1958. 10: 370-375

  • Kokubu M., Ando S., Kida N., Oda S. Interference effects between saccadic and key-press reaction times of volleyball players and nonathletes. Percept Mot Skills, 2006. 103(3):709-716 [PubMed]

  • LiviottiG., Lobietti R., Fantozzi S., Merni F. Reaction times in volleyball block: a biomechanical analysis. www.sportkinetics2007.com

  • Marmor M. F., Holder G. E., Seeliger M. W., Yamamoto S. Standard for clinical electroretinography. Doc Ophthalmol, 2004. 108: 107-114 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Web of Science]

  • McAuliffe J. Differences in attentional set between athletes and nonathletes. J Gen Psychol, 2004. 131(4): 426-437 [PubMed] [CrossRef]

  • McLeod P. Visual reaction time and high-speed ball games. Perception, 1987. 16: 49-59 [CrossRef] [PubMed]

  • Ozbek A., Bamac B., Budak F., Yenigun N., Colak T. Nerve conduction study of the ulnar nerve in volleyball players. Scand J Med Sci Sports, 2006. 16(3): 197-200 [CrossRef] [PubMed]

  • Palacz O., Lubiński W., Penkala K. Elektrofizjologiczna diagnostyka kliniczna układu wzrokowego. Oftal Warszawa, 2003.

  • Ross A., Leveritt M., Riek S. Neural influences on sprint running: training adaptations and acute responses. Sports Med, 2001. 31(6): 409-25 [PubMed] [CrossRef]

  • Smith L., Besio W., Tarjan P., Asfour S. Hemiplegia and its effect upon fractionated premotor, motor and ankle dorsiflexion reaction times. Percept Mot Skills, 1998. 86: 955-964

  • Thomas N. G., Harden L. M., Rogers G. G. Visual evoked potentials, reaction times and eye dominance in cricketers. J Sports Med. Phys Fitness, 2005. 45(3): 428-433

  • Venter S. C., Ferreira J. T. A comparison of visual skills of high school rugby players from two different age groups. S Afr Optom, 2004. 63: 19-29

  • Zeki S. A vision of the brain. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1993.

  • Zwierko T. Differences in peripheral perception between athletes and nonathletes. Journal of Human Kinetics, 2008. 19: 53-62

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.