The Effects of Biofeedback on Performance and Technique of the Boxing Jab.

Mark A Chen,I Spears,P Van Schaik,K Spanton,D Eaves

doi:10.1177/00315125211013251

Abstract

A growing body of research has addressed the application of movement-based biofeedback techniques for improving sports performers’ gross motor skills. Unlike in previous research, we aimed in this study to quantify the effects of this “external” biofeedback on selected performance and technique variables for the boxing jab among both novices and experts. The technical setup included two inertial measurement units linked wirelessly to a video game system with audio output. The units were configured to provide auditory external biofeedback, based on the peak acceleration of the bag (i.e., biofeedback with an external attentional focus). Sixteen participants (8 novices and 8 experts) performed boxing jabs against the bag in blocked phases of biofeedback. When compared to baseline, the acute effects of externally focused biofeedback on peak bag acceleration were possibly positive in both retention phases for novices (d = 0.29; d = 0.41) and likely positive for experts (d = 0.41; d = 0.30), respectively. The experts’ performance improvements were accompanied by substantive increases in trunk rotation, though this was not true for the novices. Thus, technique improvements can be promoted indirectly via externally focused biofeedback, but only when these actions are within the performers’ motor repertoire. Overall, biofeedback via inertial sensors appears to be a potent technique for modifying human movement patterns in both experts and novices. This low-cost technology could be used to support training across sports, rehabilitation and human-computer interactions.

Highlights

In human movement-related literature there is a general consensus that refinements in movement technique are associated with improved motor performance (Carson et al, 2016)
For bag acceleration (Blocks 3–7) there were no differences between the groups, as the slight upward trend was the same for both groups
In order to establish that our selection of the two groups resulted in the skill differences we expected and that our measures were sensitive, we compared these samples on both measures at baseline with magnitude-based inference. In this analysis and in those following, the smallest important effect size was defined as d 1⁄4 0.2

Summary

Introduction

In human movement-related literature there is a general consensus that refinements in movement technique are associated with improved motor performance (Carson et al, 2016). Eaves et al (2011) showed that biofeedback relating to distal, rather than proximal features of the action facilitated the acquisition of complex dance moves among novice performers. It is not clear from this literature how biofeedback might improve expert performance. Inertial measurement units offer new opportunities for providing movementrelated biofeedback These low-cost units – typically consisting of a tri-axial accelerometer, gyroscope and magnetometer – have been increasingly employed in recent movement-related research, and they have been able to capture movement variables from a specific body segment (e.g., the trunk) or an object to which these body segments are attached (e.g., tennis racket). Examples of inertial measurement units in biofeedback applications include devices to (a) enable recreational runners to adjust their patterns of body movements, reducing the shock and risk of injury during landing (Crowell et al, 2011), and (b) enable knee osteoarthritis sufferers to reduce medial pressures on the tibia condyle (Barrios et al, 2010)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion