Limits...
The Efficiency of a Visual Skills Training Program on Visual Search Performance.

Krzepota J, Zwierko T, Puchalska-Niedbał L, Markiewicz M, Florkiewicz B, Lubiński W - J Hum Kinet (2015)

Bottom Line: For the visual detecting time changes, the first factor, Group, was significant as a main effect (F(1,22)=6.49, p<0.05) as well as the second factor, Training (F(3,66)=5.06, p<0.01).Similarly, for the number of correct reactions, there was a main effect of a Group factor (F(1,22)=23.40, p<0.001), a main effect of a Training factor (F(3,66)=11.60, p<0.001) and a significant interaction between factors (Group vs.Training) (F(3,66)=10.33, p<0.001).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Physical Culture and Health Promotion, University of Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland.

ABSTRACT
In this study, we conducted an experiment in which we analyzed the possibilities to develop visual skills by specifically targeted training of visual search. The aim of our study was to investigate whether, for how long and to what extent a training program for visual functions could improve visual search. The study involved 24 healthy students from the Szczecin University who were divided into two groups: experimental (12) and control (12). In addition to regular sports and recreational activities of the curriculum, the subjects of the experimental group also participated in 8-week long training with visual functions, 3 times a week for 45 min. The Signal Test of the Vienna Test System was performed four times: before entering the study, after first 4 weeks of the experiment, immediately after its completion and 4 weeks after the study terminated. The results of this experiment proved that an 8-week long perceptual training program significantly differentiated the plot of visual detecting time. For the visual detecting time changes, the first factor, Group, was significant as a main effect (F(1,22)=6.49, p<0.05) as well as the second factor, Training (F(3,66)=5.06, p<0.01). The interaction between the two factors (Group vs. Training) of perceptual training was F(3,66)=6.82 (p<0.001). Similarly, for the number of correct reactions, there was a main effect of a Group factor (F(1,22)=23.40, p<0.001), a main effect of a Training factor (F(3,66)=11.60, p<0.001) and a significant interaction between factors (Group vs. Training) (F(3,66)=10.33, p<0.001). Our study suggests that 8-week training of visual functions can improve visual search performance.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Relative changes of visual detecting time in experimental and control groups. Pre- and post-training values are presented as means and ±SEM. A significant difference (p<0.01) between the experimental group and control group after 2 months of perceptual training (Sig_2) is denoted with ** and at control conditions (Sig_c, p<0.05) is denoted with *. Significant intragroup differences (p<0.05) in the experimental group (Sig_0 vs. Sig_1, and Sig_1 vs. Sig_2) are denoted with (†).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519214&req=5

f1-jhk-46-231: Relative changes of visual detecting time in experimental and control groups. Pre- and post-training values are presented as means and ±SEM. A significant difference (p<0.01) between the experimental group and control group after 2 months of perceptual training (Sig_2) is denoted with ** and at control conditions (Sig_c, p<0.05) is denoted with *. Significant intragroup differences (p<0.05) in the experimental group (Sig_0 vs. Sig_1, and Sig_1 vs. Sig_2) are denoted with (†).

Mentions: In our experiment, we analyzed the influence of two factors on visual detection time: (1) Group (experimental vs. control group) and (2) Training. For the visual detecting time changes, the first factor, Group, was significant as a main effect (F(1,22)=6.49, p<0.05), and the second factor, Training, was also significant as a main effect (F(3,66)=5.06, p<0.01). The interaction between two factors (Group vs. Training) of perceptual training was F(3,66)=6.82 (p<0.001). Perceptual training significantly differentiated the plot of changes in visual detection time when the experimental and control groups were compared. ANOVA contrast analysis indicated a differential effect between the experimental and control groups after two months of perceptual training (Sig_2: F(1.22)=13.10, p<0.01) and 4 weeks following the research accomplishment (Sig_c: F(1.22)=7.29, p<0.05). ANOVA contrast analysis also indicated significant intra-group differences among the experimental subjects after one month of perceptual training ((Sig_0 vs Sig_1: (F(1.22)=5.97, p<0.05)) and (Sig_1 vs Sig_2: (F(1.22)=6.38, p<0.05)). The visual detection time improved during and after training stimulation in comparison to the baseline (Sig_0 vs. Sig_2: F(1.22)=24.44, p<0.001). The plot of interactions for the analyzed factors, with regard to visual detection time, is illustrated in Figure 1.


The Efficiency of a Visual Skills Training Program on Visual Search Performance.

Krzepota J, Zwierko T, Puchalska-Niedbał L, Markiewicz M, Florkiewicz B, Lubiński W - J Hum Kinet (2015)

Relative changes of visual detecting time in experimental and control groups. Pre- and post-training values are presented as means and ±SEM. A significant difference (p<0.01) between the experimental group and control group after 2 months of perceptual training (Sig_2) is denoted with ** and at control conditions (Sig_c, p<0.05) is denoted with *. Significant intragroup differences (p<0.05) in the experimental group (Sig_0 vs. Sig_1, and Sig_1 vs. Sig_2) are denoted with (†).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519214&req=5

f1-jhk-46-231: Relative changes of visual detecting time in experimental and control groups. Pre- and post-training values are presented as means and ±SEM. A significant difference (p<0.01) between the experimental group and control group after 2 months of perceptual training (Sig_2) is denoted with ** and at control conditions (Sig_c, p<0.05) is denoted with *. Significant intragroup differences (p<0.05) in the experimental group (Sig_0 vs. Sig_1, and Sig_1 vs. Sig_2) are denoted with (†).
Mentions: In our experiment, we analyzed the influence of two factors on visual detection time: (1) Group (experimental vs. control group) and (2) Training. For the visual detecting time changes, the first factor, Group, was significant as a main effect (F(1,22)=6.49, p<0.05), and the second factor, Training, was also significant as a main effect (F(3,66)=5.06, p<0.01). The interaction between two factors (Group vs. Training) of perceptual training was F(3,66)=6.82 (p<0.001). Perceptual training significantly differentiated the plot of changes in visual detection time when the experimental and control groups were compared. ANOVA contrast analysis indicated a differential effect between the experimental and control groups after two months of perceptual training (Sig_2: F(1.22)=13.10, p<0.01) and 4 weeks following the research accomplishment (Sig_c: F(1.22)=7.29, p<0.05). ANOVA contrast analysis also indicated significant intra-group differences among the experimental subjects after one month of perceptual training ((Sig_0 vs Sig_1: (F(1.22)=5.97, p<0.05)) and (Sig_1 vs Sig_2: (F(1.22)=6.38, p<0.05)). The visual detection time improved during and after training stimulation in comparison to the baseline (Sig_0 vs. Sig_2: F(1.22)=24.44, p<0.001). The plot of interactions for the analyzed factors, with regard to visual detection time, is illustrated in Figure 1.

Bottom Line: For the visual detecting time changes, the first factor, Group, was significant as a main effect (F(1,22)=6.49, p<0.05) as well as the second factor, Training (F(3,66)=5.06, p<0.01).Similarly, for the number of correct reactions, there was a main effect of a Group factor (F(1,22)=23.40, p<0.001), a main effect of a Training factor (F(3,66)=11.60, p<0.001) and a significant interaction between factors (Group vs.Training) (F(3,66)=10.33, p<0.001).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Physical Culture and Health Promotion, University of Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland.

ABSTRACT
In this study, we conducted an experiment in which we analyzed the possibilities to develop visual skills by specifically targeted training of visual search. The aim of our study was to investigate whether, for how long and to what extent a training program for visual functions could improve visual search. The study involved 24 healthy students from the Szczecin University who were divided into two groups: experimental (12) and control (12). In addition to regular sports and recreational activities of the curriculum, the subjects of the experimental group also participated in 8-week long training with visual functions, 3 times a week for 45 min. The Signal Test of the Vienna Test System was performed four times: before entering the study, after first 4 weeks of the experiment, immediately after its completion and 4 weeks after the study terminated. The results of this experiment proved that an 8-week long perceptual training program significantly differentiated the plot of visual detecting time. For the visual detecting time changes, the first factor, Group, was significant as a main effect (F(1,22)=6.49, p<0.05) as well as the second factor, Training (F(3,66)=5.06, p<0.01). The interaction between the two factors (Group vs. Training) of perceptual training was F(3,66)=6.82 (p<0.001). Similarly, for the number of correct reactions, there was a main effect of a Group factor (F(1,22)=23.40, p<0.001), a main effect of a Training factor (F(3,66)=11.60, p<0.001) and a significant interaction between factors (Group vs. Training) (F(3,66)=10.33, p<0.001). Our study suggests that 8-week training of visual functions can improve visual search performance.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus