Motor Behavior

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Magazine fees received

Guide for Authors

forms

Peer Review Process

Effect of PETTLEP Mental Imagery and Physical Practice on Pre-motor and Motor Parts of Simple and Choice Reaction Time

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 M.Sc. of Motor Learning and Control, University of Isfahan

2 Assistance Professor Motor Behavior, University of Isfahan

3 Associate Professor of Motor Behavior, University of Isfahan

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to determine the effect of PETTLEP imagery and physical practice of choice reaction time on simple and choice reaction time and the pre-motor and motor areas of simple and choice reaction time. Based on mental imagery ability that measured by Vividness of Movement Imagery Questionnaire 2, 26 non-athlete girl students (age 21.23±1.2 years) were chosen purposefully and divided in two groups, each comprising 13 individuals to perform PETTLEP mental imagery exercise and physical exercise of reaction time. The Simple and choice reaction time of subjects were recorded in pre-test and after 10 sessions of 10 repetitions training by researcher-made reaction time device. In the post-test, in addition to recording reaction time, pre-motor and motor areas of reaction time in both simple and choice situations were recorded using electromyography. For analyzing data, the statistical methods of mixed two- way ANOVA and t-test were used in SPSS 23 software. The results showed that after the intervention, the simple (P=0.004) and choice (P=0.001) reaction time was reduced significantly in both groups. Also, there was a significant difference between the two kinds of exercise in simple reaction time (P=0.045). However, there wasn’t any significant difference between these two kinds of exercise in terms of reducing choice reaction time. Therefore, it can be concluded that by solving cognitive problems and reducing the time needed for information processing, PETTLEP imagery and physical exercise help to reduce reaction time.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References
  1. Alikhani H, VaezMousavi M, Mokhtari P. The Effect of Cognitive and Motivational Imagery on Choice Reaction Time. World Applied Sciences Journal. 2011; 12 (6):792-6.
  2. Schmidt RA, Wrisberg CA. Motor learning and performance.United states:Human Kinetics; 2004. chapter3.
  3. Magill RA, Anderson D. Motor learning and control: Concepts and applications: McGraw-Hill, New York; 2007. p. 90-1, 172-3.
  4. Schmidt RA, Lee T. Motor control and learning: a behavioral amphasis. Human kinetics; 2005. Chapter 3.
  5. Grouios G. On the Reduction of Reaction Time with Mental Practice. Journal of Motor Behavior; 1992.15 (2).141-57.
  6. Sternberg S. Reaction-time experimentation. Psychology. 2004; 600:301
  7. Abu-Saleh KM. The Effect of Volley Ball Training Program on The Reaction Time. Scientific Journal of King Faisal University (Humanities and Management Sciences). 2009; 10 (1): 14 – 30.
  8. Ghuntla TP, Mehta HB, Gokhale PA, Shah CJ. Influence of practice on visual reaction time. Journal of Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences. 2014; 19 (2): 119 - 27.
  9. Broggin E, Savazzi S, Marzi CA. Similar effects of visual perception and imagery on simple reaction time. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2012; 65 (1): 151-64.
  10. Jeannerod M. Mental imagery in the motor context. Neuropsychologia. 1995; 33 (11):1419-32
  11. Smith D, Wright CJ, Cantwell C. Beating the bunker: The effect of PETTLEP imagery on golf bunker shot performance. Research quarterly for exercise and sport. 2008; 79 (3): 385-91.
  12. Tahmasebi broujeni Sh, Qods mirheidari S. the effects of different imagery models on the equilibrium of Tehran University girl students. Journal of motor development and learnin.2012;111:9-127. (In persian)
  13. Holmes PS, Collins DJ. The PETTLEP approach to motor imagery: A functional equivalence model for sport psychologists. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 2001; 13 (1): 60-83.
  14. Sternberg RJ, Sternberg K. Cognitive psychology. Seyed Kamal Kharazi, Elahe Hejazi. 4. Tehran: Samt; 2006. P. 347. (In Persian)
  15. Holmes P, Collins D. Functional equivalence solutions for problems with motor imagery. Solutions in sport psychology. 2002; 1: 120-40.
  16. Qorbani A, Qotbi V, Parhizkar kohne oghaz, J. The comparison of Pettlep mental imagery and physical exercise effects on the acquisition and retention of dart throwing skill. Motor behavior. 2012; 5 (13): 125-38. (In Persian)
  17. Mahoney M, Avener M. Psychology of the elite athlete: an exploratory study. Cognitive Therapy and Research.1977; 1: 135-41.
  18. Weinberg RS, Gould D. Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 6E: Human Kinetics.
  19. Shanks DR, Cameron A. The effect of mental practice on performance in a sequential reaction time task. Journal of motor behavior. 2000;32 (3): 305-13.
  20. Hemmati nejad, R. Rahmaninia, F. Adibesaber, F. The effect of mental exercise on the choice reaction time of women athletes. physiological researches and sports management. 2006; 3:12-5. (In Persian)
  21. Smith D, Wright C, Allsopp A, Westhead H. It’s all in the mind: PETTLEP-based imagery and sports performance. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 2007: 19: 80-92.
  22. Wright CJ, Smith DK. The effect of a short-term PETTLEP imagery intervention on a cognitive task. Journal of imagery research in sport and physical activity. 2007; 2 (1). 1-14.
  23. Vealey RS. Current status and prominent issues in sport psychology interventions. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 1994. 26 (4): 495-502.
  24. Murdock BB. Human memory: Theory and data: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1974.chapter2.
  25. Anderson JR. Cognitive psychology and its implications.7. Worth Publishers, 2009. chapter6.
  26. McAvinue LP, Robertson IH. Measuring motor imagery ability: a review. European journal of cognitive psychology. 2008; 20 (2): 232-51.
  27. Roberts R, Callow N, Hardy L, Markland D, Bringer J. Movement imagery ability: Development and assessment of a revised version of the vividness of movement imagery questionnaire. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology. 2008. (30):200-21.
  28. Rostami Haji Abadi M, Effect of guided on the functional rehabilitation of knee injured male athletes,MA thesis, Isfahan: University Isfahan; 2010. (In Persian)
  29. Ando S, Kida N, Oda S. Practice effects on reaction time for peripheral and central visual fields. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 2002; 95(3): 747-51.
  30. Sanders AF. Elements of Human Performance: Reaction Processes and Attention in Human Skill. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey. 1998; 575 pages.
  31. Beik M. The effect yoga training on cognitive and executive fauctions in children with attention deficit- hyperactivity disorder, M.A. thesis, Isfahan: University of Isfahan; 2013.
  32. Sayed-al-Husseini, M. The effects of two types of mental and physical exercises on the reaction time (simple and choice) of non-elite boy students of physical education faculty of Tehran University. M.A thesis. Tehran, Tehran University. 2000.
  33. Martens R. Coaches guide to sport psychology. Mohammad Khabiri. 1. Tehran: Bamdade ketab. 2006. p. 175-6. (In Persian)
  34. Sohrabi M, Fathi M. Application mental skills in sport. 2. Tehran: Sport Science Research Institute; 2013. P.60-70. (In Persian)
  35. Abrams RA, Balota DA. Mental chronometry: Beyond reaction time. Psychological Science. 1991;2 (3):153-7.
  36. Nezakatalhoseini M, Jaberi A. Sport Psychology and exercise. Isfahan: university of Isfahan, 2013. P. 288-9. (In Persian)
  37. Morris, H.H. Effects of practice and set upon reaction time and its fractionated components. In D.M. Landers & R.W. Christina (Eds.), Psychology of motor behavior and sport. Champaign: Human Kinetics, 1977.
  38. Grouios G. The effect of mental practice on diving performance. International Journal of Sport Psychology. 1992. 23 (1): 60-9.
  39. Greg Anson J. Memory drum theory: Alternative tests and explanations for the complexity effects on simple reaction time. Journal of Motor Behavior. 1982;14 (3): 228-46.
  40. Christina R W, Fischman, MG, Vercruyssen, M JP, Anson JG. Simple reaction time as a function of response complexity: Memory drum theory revisited. Journal of Motor Behavior, 1982. P. 301-2.
  41. Nagazaki H. Aoki Fand Nakamura R. Premotor and motor reaction time as a function of force output. J. of Perceptual and Motor Skills,1983. 57: 859-67.
Motor Behavior
Volume 10, Issue 31
Spring 2018
May 2018
Pages 17-38
Files
History
  • Receive Date: 14 May 2016
  • Revise Date: 03 December 2016
  • Accept Date: 24 December 2016
Share
How to cite
Statistics