Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
1
Professor, Department of Sport Behavioral Sciences, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University Of Tehran Kish International Campus, Tehran, Iran.
2
Ph.D. Student in Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University Of Tehran Kish International Campus, Tehran, Iran.
3
Associate Professor, Department of Sport Behavioral Sciences, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University Of Tehran Kish International Campus, Tehran, Iran
4
Associate Professor, Department of Behavioral Sciences in Sport, Sport Sciences Research Institute, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
Background
Perceived stress has a significant impact on the performance of elite athletes and can impair performance in fast-paced, decision-driven sports such as volleyball by weakening attentional control and emotional regulation. Neurofeedback and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), as non-invasive neuromodulation interventions, have attracted growing attention; however, direct comparative studies of these two methods in athletic populations remain limited. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of neurofeedback and tDCS in reducing perceived stress in national-level male volleyball players.Methods
This quasi-experimental study used a pretest-posttest design with a control group. Thirty national-level male volleyball players (aged 16 to 32 years) were selected through convenience sampling and randomly assigned to three groups of ten: neurofeedback, tDCS, and control. Perceived stress was measured using the 14-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-14). Both intervention groups received 12 sessions (with 2-mA stimulation for the tDCS group); the control group received no intervention. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (P<0.05).Results
A significant difference in posttest stress was found among groups (F(2,27)=12.86, P<0.001, η²=0.49). Both neurofeedback (P<0.001) and tDCS (P=0.002) significantly reduced stress compared with control, but the difference between the two intervention groups was not significant (P=0.548). Mean stress decreased from 32.10±4.51 to 22.80±3.21 in the neurofeedback group and from 31.60±4.38 to 25.20±3.76 in the tDCS group; no change occurred in the control group.
Conclusion
Both interventions, despite differing mechanisms, reduced perceived stress to a similar degree and may serve as complementary tools in athletes' psychological preparation for stress management.
Keywords
Subjects
