Back to all available

Neuromechanical responses to intermittent visual occlusion during side-cutting in elite football players: a randomised crossover study

anatomy-and-physiology
kinesiology
neurology
biomechanics

Abstract

Background: Stroboscopic vision (SV), characterized by intermittent visual occlusion, has been proposed as a novel perceptual stimulus to challenge sensorimotor integration in sport. This study aimed to investigate the acute effects of SV on lower-limb biomechanics and neuromuscular control during football-specific side-cutting maneuvers.

Methods: Twenty-two elite male football athletes performed side-cutting maneuvers under full vision (FV) and SV conditions, both with and without dribbling, in a randomized crossover design. Three-dimensional kinematics, ground reaction forces (GRF), and surface electromyography (sEMG) of nine lower-limb muscles were recorded. Statistical comparisons between FV and SV conditions were performed using paired t-tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, with significance set at p < 0.05.

Results: SV significantly increased braking velocity (p < 0.001) and peak vertical GRF (p = 0.014). During dribbling, SV also led to greater velocity deficits (p = 0.001) and altered GRF distribution, with increased anteroposterior (p = 0.001) and reduced mediolateral forces (p = 0.017). Non-dribbling trials under SV showed increased hip abduction (p = 0.001) and knee flexion angles (p = 0.032) at initial contact, greater peak hip abduction moment (p = 0.038), and higher peak knee power (p = 0.002). sEMG analysis revealed elevated pre-activation of the vastus lateralis (p = 0.019) and semitendinosus (p = 0.038) under SV in non-dribbling trials, and selectively increased vastus lateralis (p = 0.023) with reduced tibialis anterior (p = 0.017) activity during dribbling.

Conclusion: Stroboscopic vision acutely alters neuromechanical strategies during football side-cutting, particularly under dribbling conditions, by increasing mechanical load, modifying joint control, and reorganizing muscle pre-activation patterns.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].