An ERP Study On The Cued Feature Of Decision Of Fencer

Fencing is a kind of combat activity that is directly antagonistic. The nature ofthis activity requires the athletes must be quickly reactive, highly accurate, andflexibly conversional. On competition grounds, athletes must swiftly change betweenattack and defense, and must make decisions in response to the activities of theopponents. These complicated activities and decisions all depend on basic perception,discrimination and strategy selections. Studies have shown that fencing athletes arevery highly competitive in strong visual search, excellent perception prediction, andquick motion selections. The study also digs deeply in neuromechanism of activityexperts. However, few researchers have studied whether or not the position clues priorto any motions would affect the consequential motion strategy decisions. Just becauseof this, this research studied the behavior nature of three kinds of basic decisions andtheir corresponding neuromechanism, which provides new theoretical evidence tomotion decisions.This study theoretically based on cued position prior to inhibition of return,digged in from motion strategies of different difficulty grades. This study madecontrast in Shanghai University of Sports between ordinary college undergraduatesand professional fencer athletes of over National Second Grade. Through combinationof double cued-target paradigm and various cognition tasks of different difficulty, andthrough Event Related Potential techniques, and through of nature of athletes’ postmotions in response of valid/invalid cues and the abilities of inhibition of return, thisstudy made a research into the cued decision nature of fencer and its possibleneuromechanism, which further enriched the theory of motion decision and inhibitionof return and also provided theoretical evidence to scientific training of fencers.The results of this study show:(1) In detection tasks done under cued visualpositions, the amplitude of P1wave is related to the cued position. In invalid cuedpositions, fencers generate great and early P1waves, whereas the ordinaryundergraduate college students generate small and late P1waves. In detection tasks,fencers generate smaller P300, and the subjects make quicker detection decisions ininvalid cued localization.(2) Differentiating stimuli under different cues, fences’reaction time is less than ordinary undergraduate college students,and their IOR isgreater. Under NoGo trials, subjects’ P3wave is significantly greater than that underGo trials. P3wave of NoGo is greater in invalid cues than that in valid cues.(3) The subjects make quicker localization actions to the targets under invalid cued positions.As to this invalid cued localization, fencers are more swift than ordinaryundergraduate college students. Through localization to targets under the existence ofdistractors, fencers generate greater N1amplitude. N1wave amplitude generated bysubjects under valid cued positions is greater than that under invalid positions. Thegreatest point of P300is at Pz potential point.(4) Under different cued conditions,fencers react faster than ordinary undergraduate college students, and fencers’accuracy is less than college students but is not significant. Fencers generate early andgreat P1and N1waves. Fencers make more valid P1and N1when make strategicdecisions under invalid localizations than under valid localizations. P300is significantdifferent between groups, and reach it highest point at Pz electrode.Through the analysis of study results, conclusions are drawn as below:(1) underthe cognition tasks and discrimination tasks of different cued conditions, fencersshowed the strategic decision advantage of quick response and high accuracy over thecontrast group. Fencers spent less time on completing the tasks than the contrastgroup.(2) fencers spent less time to complete strategic tasks of different difficultyunder invalid cues than the contrast group, which showed that fencers have strongabilities of inhibition of return. It is concluded that fencers have more superior visualsearch abilities.(3) Under invalid cues, fencers’ visual abilities are characteristicallyearly and highly activated, and distribute more resources on the attention on the targetemergence on invalid cues.(4) Fencers distribute less psychological resources oncued strategic decision, whereas under equivalent conditions, undergraduate collegestudents showed economization.This study enriches the motion strategic decision theories of fencers, helpstraining for fencers. On combination of ERP techniques, this study makes a systematicresearch into the nature of strategic decisions of fencers on different cues, andtechnically methologically expands the limitation of study on fencers’ strategicdecision. In addition, this study discusses the behavior characteristics and inhibition ofreturn of fencers’ completing different cognition tasks under different cues. Throughthe relations between valid/invalid visual cues and emergence positions of targets incognitive tasks, it is testified that fencers are advantageous on quick strategic decisionand strong on inhibition of return from time and space perspective, which also showsthat visual cues affect the consequential cognitive task processing and that fencers’motion strategic decisions are mediated by cued positions. The study complementscognitive advantage theories of sport experts.