Related to performance level, the secondary aim was to examine motivation of participants. Intentionally sampling actively competitive participants allowed us to isolate the effect of the task length on the original results of Schücker and MacMahon ( 8). This sampling allowed us to address that comparison studies incorporating shorter fatiguing tasks have found an effect on physical performance, but have not focused particularly on the experience of the participants, who were often defined as inactive/inexperienced ( 12, 16), untrained ( 6), or at best, sport students ( 14). In addition, the key feature of this study was the intentional sampling of actively competing recreational athletes. Thus, the main goal of this study was to retest the manipulations of Schücker and MacMahon ( 8) using a 30-min Stroop task instead of a 10-min Stroop task.
#Beep test full#
It is thus notable that the research shows that not only does the Stroop task increase perceived fatigue and impair subsequent full body physical performance, it can do so after only a few minutes of the task ( 12, 14– 16). ( 13) found that the participants’ performance declined after 30 min of the Stroop task, compared with the performance after 30 min of leisurely reading of emotionally neutral magazines. ( 13), who used a physical task similar to the beep test, the Yo-Yo intermittent running task. This suggestion is further supported by Smith et al. ( 2) suggest that for complex, full body endurance tasks, the cognitive task must have a minimum duration of 30 min to influence physical performance.
In line with this finding, Van Cutsem et al. In comparison, Schücker and MacMahon ( 8) found that 10 min of the Stroop task did not have a negative effect on beep test performance. For example, Brown and Bray ( 6) found a threshold effect for the Stroop task after 4–6 min of the Stroop task, there were negative effects on a handgrip endurance task. One key factor is that the length of the cognitive task is inconsistent throughout the literature in this area and has ranged from 3 min ( 12) to 90 min ( 9, 10), with different results depending on the study’s design. The inconsistent effects in this area are exemplified by Schücker and MacMahon ( 8), who found that active participants were not impeded in running the beep test, an externally paced 20-m shuttle run ( 11), after completing a demanding cognitive task. ( 10) showed that participants in a self-paced running task (3-km time trial) ran significantly slower in the exertion condition compared with the control condition. They found that participants withdrew from the physical task significantly earlier in the exertion condition compared with the control condition.
#Beep test trial#
( 9) tested performance in a cycling time trial after a 90-min cognitive task compared with a control condition in which participants watched a 90-min documentary.
Support for the finding that cognitive exertion has a negative impact on physical performance is exemplified in two key studies. In particular, this study sought to explore the influence of the length of the manipulation task, in follow-up from a previous study ( 8). Concomitant with the increasing amount of research in this topic are some inconsistencies, as researchers look to understand the complex interplay of factors, including the specific cognitive task used, the target physical task, and individual difference variables, such as training background and motivation (e.g., ). Indeed, the growth of interest in this topic is evidenced by a number of recent review articles (e.g., ) and a boom in the empirical work from a number of different subdisciplines (e.g., ). An expanding area of research is devoted to understanding the effects of cognitive and self-control tasks on physical performance.