Effects of 6-Week Motor-Cognitive Agility Training on Football Test Performance in Adult Amateur Players – A Three-Armed Randomized Controlled Trial

David Friebe, W. Banzer, F. Giesche, Christian Haser, T. Hülsdünker, Florian Pfab, Fritz Rußmann, Johanna Sieland, Fabio Spataro, L. Vogt
{"title":"Effects of 6-Week Motor-Cognitive Agility Training on Football Test Performance in Adult Amateur Players – A Three-Armed Randomized Controlled Trial","authors":"David Friebe, W. Banzer, F. Giesche, Christian Haser, T. Hülsdünker, Florian Pfab, Fritz Rußmann, Johanna Sieland, Fabio Spataro, L. Vogt","doi":"10.52082/jssm.2024.276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Agility, defined as the ability to rapidly respond to unforeseen events, constitutes a central performance component in football. Existing agility training approaches often focus on change of direction that does not reflect the complex motor-cognitive demands on the pitch. The objective of this study is to examine the effects of a novel motor-cognitive dual-task agility training (Multiple-object tracking integrated into agility training) on agility and football-specific test performance parameters, compared to agility and a change of direction (COD) training. Adult male amateur football players (n = 42; age: 27±6; height: 181±7cm; weight: 80±12kg) were randomly allocated to one of the three intervention groups (COD, agility, agility + multiple object tracking). The Loughborough Soccer Passing Test (LSPT), a dribbling test with/without cognitive task as well as the Random Star Run (with/without ball) and the modified T-Test were assessed before and after a 6-week training period. Time effects within the T-Test (F = 83.9; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.68) and dribbling test without cognitive task (F = 23.9; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.38) with improvements of all intervention groups (p < 0.05) were found. Dribbling with cognitive task revealed a time effect (F = 7.8; p = 0.008; η2 = 0.17), with improvements exclusively in the agility and dual-task agility groups (p < 0.05). Random Star Run with and without ball exhibited a time (F = 38.8; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.5; F = 82.7; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.68) and interaction effect (F = 14.14; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.42; F = 27.8; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.59), with improvements for the agility and dual-task agility groups. LSPT showed no time, group or interaction effect. The effects of change of direction training are limited to change of direction and dribbling test performance within preplanned scenarios. In contrast, motor-cognitive agility interventions result in notable enhancements in football-specific and agility tests, incorporating decision-making and multitasking components. No differences were observed between agility and agility + multiple object tracking. To achieve a transfer to game-relevant performance, coaches should focus on integrating cognitive challenges into motor training.","PeriodicalId":506848,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sports Science and Medicine","volume":"31 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sports Science and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52082/jssm.2024.276","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Agility, defined as the ability to rapidly respond to unforeseen events, constitutes a central performance component in football. Existing agility training approaches often focus on change of direction that does not reflect the complex motor-cognitive demands on the pitch. The objective of this study is to examine the effects of a novel motor-cognitive dual-task agility training (Multiple-object tracking integrated into agility training) on agility and football-specific test performance parameters, compared to agility and a change of direction (COD) training. Adult male amateur football players (n = 42; age: 27±6; height: 181±7cm; weight: 80±12kg) were randomly allocated to one of the three intervention groups (COD, agility, agility + multiple object tracking). The Loughborough Soccer Passing Test (LSPT), a dribbling test with/without cognitive task as well as the Random Star Run (with/without ball) and the modified T-Test were assessed before and after a 6-week training period. Time effects within the T-Test (F = 83.9; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.68) and dribbling test without cognitive task (F = 23.9; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.38) with improvements of all intervention groups (p < 0.05) were found. Dribbling with cognitive task revealed a time effect (F = 7.8; p = 0.008; η2 = 0.17), with improvements exclusively in the agility and dual-task agility groups (p < 0.05). Random Star Run with and without ball exhibited a time (F = 38.8; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.5; F = 82.7; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.68) and interaction effect (F = 14.14; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.42; F = 27.8; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.59), with improvements for the agility and dual-task agility groups. LSPT showed no time, group or interaction effect. The effects of change of direction training are limited to change of direction and dribbling test performance within preplanned scenarios. In contrast, motor-cognitive agility interventions result in notable enhancements in football-specific and agility tests, incorporating decision-making and multitasking components. No differences were observed between agility and agility + multiple object tracking. To achieve a transfer to game-relevant performance, coaches should focus on integrating cognitive challenges into motor training.
为期 6 周的运动认知敏捷性训练对成年业余球员足球测试成绩的影响--三臂随机对照试验
敏捷性被定义为对意外事件做出快速反应的能力,是足球运动中的核心表现要素。现有的敏捷性训练方法通常侧重于改变方向,无法反映球场上复杂的运动认知需求。本研究的目的是,与敏捷和变向(COD)训练相比,考察一种新颖的运动认知双任务敏捷训练(将多目标追踪融入敏捷训练)对敏捷和足球特定测试成绩参数的影响。成年男性业余足球运动员(n = 42;年龄:27±6;身高:181±7 厘米;体重:80±12 千克)被随机分配到三个干预组之一(COD、敏捷、敏捷 + 多目标跟踪)。在为期 6 周的训练前后,分别进行了拉夫堡足球通过测试(LSPT)、带/不带认知任务的运球测试以及随机星形跑(带/不带球)和改良 T 测试的评估。在 T 测试(F = 83.9;p < 0.001;η2 = 0.68)和无认知任务运球测试(F = 23.9;p < 0.001;η2 = 0.38)中发现了时间效应,所有干预组的成绩都有所提高(p < 0.05)。认知任务运球显示了时间效应(F = 7.8;p = 0.008;η2 = 0.17),只有敏捷组和双任务敏捷组的成绩有所提高(p < 0.05)。有球和无球随机星形跑显示出时间效应(F = 38.8;p < 0.001;η2 = 0.5;F = 82.7;p < 0.001;η2 = 0.68)和交互效应(F = 14.14;p < 0.001;η2 = 0.42;F = 27.8;p < 0.001;η2 = 0.59),敏捷和双任务敏捷组的成绩有所提高。LSPT 没有显示时间、组别或交互效应。变向训练的效果仅限于在预先计划的场景中的变向和运球测试成绩。与此相反,运动认知敏捷性干预能显著提高足球专项测试和敏捷性测试的成绩,其中包括决策和多任务处理部分。在敏捷性和敏捷性+多目标跟踪之间没有观察到差异。为了实现与比赛相关的表现转移,教练应注重将认知挑战融入运动训练中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信