EFFECTS OF STROBOSCOPIC VISUAL TRAINING ON REACTION TIME AND EYE–HAND COORDINATION IN UNIVERSITY STUDENTS

Author(s): SPICA, G., CORRADO, S., TERRIACA, M., MANCONE, S., DIOTAIUTI, P., Institution: UNIVERSITÀ DI CASSINO E DEL LAZIO MERIDIONALE, Country: ITALY, Abstract-ID: 2000

INTRODUCTION:

Stroboscopic visual training has been proposed as an effective method to enhance visuo-motor performance by inducing adaptations to intermittent visual input. While evidence has mainly focused on elite athletes, its effects in non-elite populations remain unclear. This study investigated the effects of an 8-week stroboscopic visual training program on reaction time and eye–hand coordination in university students.
The aim of this study was to examine the effects of an 8-week stroboscopic visual training program on reaction time and eye–hand coordination in university students. Specifically, we sought to determine whether intermittent visual occlusion could induce measurable improvements in visuo-motor performance in a non-elite population, as has been observed in athletes. Moreover, the study aimed to assess the retention of any improvements after a 6-week follow-up, providing insight into the potential long-term benefits of stroboscopic training for enhancing daily functional and sport-related tasks.


METHODS:
A groupe of University students (10 males, 10 females; 25.7 ± 2.1 years) were randomly assigned to a stroboscopic training group (SG, n = 10) and a control group (CG, n = 10). The SG completed an 8-week program (3 sessions·week⁻¹), using stroboscopic glasses with progressively increasing visual occlusion, whereas the CG performed the same tasks without visual interruption. The subjects had to perform two different tasks: a computer test with PEBL (Simon Test and Change detection Test); a reaction time test using a purpose-built panel (height: 180 cm; length: 120 cm) with six LED lights. Time and eye–hand coordination were assessed at baseline, post-intervention at 4 week, and follow-up at 6-week.

RESULTS:
Compared with the CG, the SG showed greater improvements in reaction time and coordination following the intervention. Specifically, performance in a high-speed visuomotor reaction task improved by 56% in the SG (from 0.34 s to 0.15 s) and these improvements were retained at follow-up (0.14 s). In addition, computer-based assessments revealed a greater reduction in reaction time in the SG compared with the CG (p = 0.01; ηp² = 0.84).

CONCLUSION:
An 8-week stroboscopic visual training program significantly enhanced reaction time and eye–hand coordination in the SG, with effects persisting at follow-up. These findings demonstrate the effectiveness of stroboscopic training as a complementary method to improve visuo-motor performance in the participants.