Rossettini Giacomo, Testa Marco, Vicentini Marco, Manganotti Paolo
Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genova, Campus of Savona, Via Magliotto 2, 17100 Savona, Italy.
Psychiatric Hospital "Villa Santa Chiara", Verona, Italy.
Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:2946465. doi: 10.1155/2017/2946465. Epub 2017 Feb 14.
External focus of attention (EFA) and internal focus of attention (IFA) represent commonly used strategies to instruct subjects during exercise. Several studies showed EFA to be more effective than IFA to improve motor performance and learning. To date the role of these strategies on motor performance during finger movement was less studied. The objective of the study was to investigate motor performance, patient's preference induced by IFA and EFA, and the focus during control condition. Ten healthy right-handed participants performed a finger movement task in control, EFA, and IFA conditions (counterbalanced). Errors, patient's preference, and type of attentional focus spontaneously adopted during the control condition were recorded. EFA determined less error ( < 0.01) compared to control and IFA. Participants preferred EFA against IFA and control condition. In the control group 10% of subjects adopted a purely EFA, 70% of subjects adopted a purely IFA, and 20% of subjects adopted a mixture of the two foci. Our results confirm that EFA is more effective than IFA and control in finger movement task. Due its clinical relevance, the interaction between attention and finger movement should be further investigated.
外部注意力焦点（EFA）和内部注意力焦点（IFA）是运动过程中指导受试者的常用策略。多项研究表明，在提高运动表现和学习方面，EFA比IFA更有效。迄今为止，这些策略在手指运动过程中对运动表现的作用研究较少。本研究的目的是调查运动表现、由IFA和EFA引起的患者偏好以及控制条件下的注意力焦点。10名健康的右利手参与者在控制、EFA和IFA条件下（采用平衡设计）执行手指运动任务。记录错误、患者偏好以及在控制条件下自发采用的注意力焦点类型。与控制和IFA相比，EFA导致的错误更少（<0.01）。参与者相对于IFA和控制条件更喜欢EFA。在对照组中，10%的受试者采用纯粹的EFA，70%的受试者采用纯粹的IFA，20%的受试者采用两种焦点的混合。我们的结果证实，在手指运动任务中，EFA比IFA和控制更有效。鉴于其临床相关性，注意力与手指运动之间的相互作用应进一步研究。
