Concerning to the motor control, we can present several models of velocity-accuracy response. Some of them try to demonstrate that reaction time (TCRT) is influenced (a) by the capacity of response-processing; (b) by a number of alternatives and (c) by the execution time. Goalball can be played by visual handicapped persons. We studied the reaction time and decision making in the Goalball athletes, and other subjects without physical activity’s practice. The sample (N=42) had 2 male groups: athletes (n=21) and non athletes (n=21). We used descriptive and inferential (t Student test) statistics (significance level = p≤.05). Concerning the results, we found significant differences intra-groups: (i) for SRT: athletes presented better scores to preferential hand (p=.003) and foot (p=.000); (ii) for TCRT: athletes presented better performances in the first trial (p=.05); (iii) for decision making: non athletes presented better performances (p=.012); Goalball practice seems to improve subject’s simple and complex reaction time. However, according to the decision making the differences were not significant, and concerning to the decision errors the non players performed better. We suggest, like Zelaznick et al. (1996), that an improvement in time required for programming produces an increase in TCRT. Goalball athletes are more accurate at implementing strategies and more conscious about the negative effects of an inconvenient action in game.
In Team Sports athletes must deal with several and varied information in a short period of time. In these sports, also there are many different situations and richness of contents (Tavares,1993). Not to see, you only need to close your eyes, but you still listen the surrounding noise. The auditive space is very different from the visual space, because it involves information becoming from all the directions (Pereira,1987). So, the visual impaired will have to pay attention to choose the most useful noise, among the different ones he hears. In Goalball, the player’s decision speed is very important, as he needs to quickly identify the presence of the ball and its location, as well as the position of the other players (Rodrigues, 2002).
AIM OF THE STUDY
To compare the levels of motor performance between Goalball athletes and nonathletes, concerning the: Simple Reaction Time (SRT), Two-Choice Reaction Time (TCRT), Decision Time (DT) Errors.
Sample: 42 visual impaired men 21 Goalball athlets – 85% of the Goalball athletes during the season 21 Non-athletes Ages between 18 and 51 years old Evaluation Instrument The “Dufour’s PD12 Attention Diffusé” instrument show the time in hundred of seconds (100/s), recording the time, the errors and the stimuli. Subjects answered to auditive stimuli as fast as they could, trying not to commit errors. Statistical procedures To compare both groups (athletes and non-athletes) we used the Mann Whitney’s test. The level of significance was set at .05
Simple Reaction Time
Table1- The Simple Reaction Time in the athletes of Goalball and non athletes
We can see that the lowest scores correspond to the best performance, what means that the subjects answered faster to the auditory incentives. The differences are statistically significant.
Table2 – Two-Choosing Reaction Time in the athletes of Goalball and non athletes The two-choosing reaction time results were obtained through the record of the times of the first and second sequences (sixteen stimuli each), being obtained a general results in the end. For the analysis of the table 2, the presented scores demonstrate that differences are statistically significant related to two-choosing reaction time in the first sequence. However, this situation if not verified in second sequence. In the general, the Goalball athletes at two-chosing reaction time is better, not having been (the difference among the two groups) statistically significant.
Table3 – Answering Errors in the athletes of Goalball and non athletes
In the analysis of the medium number of answer mistakes, the difference between Goalball athletes and non-athletes is statistically significant. It is verified that Goalball athletes present a large number of mistakes.
Table4 – Decision Time in the athletes of Goalball and non athletes
In the table we have the result of decision time, where we can see that non-athletes waist less time to decide than Goalball athletes. However, the differences are not statistically significant.
Goalball athletes present better performance in SPR and TCRT practices show an evaluation of the Reaction Time Non-athletes present better performance in Errors and DT.
- Rodrigues, N. (2002). Goalball – Estudo sobre o estado de conhecimento da modalidade e avaliação desportivo-motora dos atletas. Tese de Mestrado em Actividade Física Adaptada. FCDEF-UP. Porto.
- Pereira, L.(1987). Contribuição para o estudo do papel dos sentidos na organização de informação. Análise do equilíbrio e da estruturação espacial de uma população escolar dos 6 aos 13 anos, de capacidade visual nula ou muito reduzida de estabelecimento precoce. Tese de Doutoramento. UTL – FMH. Lisboa.
- Proteau, L.; Girouard, Y.(1987). La prise de Décision Rapide en Situation de Choix Dichotomique : une approche intégrée qui tient compte de l´amorce et de l´éxécution de la réponse. Revue Canadienne de Psychologie, 41(4), 442-473.
- Tavares, F.(1993). A capacidade de decisão táctica no jogo de Basquetebol. Tese de Doutoramento. FCDEF-UP. Porto.
- Zlaznik, H.; Hawkins, B. e Kisselburgh, L.(1996). Rapid Visual Feedback Processing in Single-Aiming Movements. J. Motor Behavior, 3:217-236.