OPTIMAL Motor Learning in Table Tennis: A fNIRS Study
Does the OPTIMAL Theory Enhance Motor Learning and Cognitive and Sensorimotor Area Cortical Activation? A Theoretical Mechanism Validation in Young, Older Adults, and Cognitively Impaired Older Adults Novice Table Tennis Players
This study investigates how OPTIMAL theory influences table tennis backhand learning in young, healthy older, and mild cognitively impaired older adults. Meanwhile, we investigate the neural mechanisms of motor skill acquisition across different ages. This study utilizes functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to monitor brain activity. Beyond immediate performance, the research focuses on Retention (sustained skill over time) and Transfer (application to novel tasks) as critical indicators of true motor learning. To ensure objective results, a double-blind design is employed, where both participants and data analysts remain blinded to group assignments during behavioral and fNIRS data processing to minimize bias.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Hui-Ting Shih, PT, PhD
- Phone Number: +886 921 078 256
- Email: huiting.shih@nycu.edu.tw
Study Locations
-
-
-
Taipei, Taiwan
- National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University
-
Contact:
- Hui-Ting Shih, PT, PhD
- Phone Number: +886-921078256
- Email: huiting.shih@nycu.edu.tw
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Healthy young adults are aged between 18 and 30 years, while healthy older adults and older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are aged between 65 and 80 years. Regarding cognitive criteria, healthy young adults and healthy older adults must score 24 or higher on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Older adults with MCI must further meet the following diagnostic criteria for MCI:
- Subjective cognitive decline: The participants themselves or their family members/primary caregivers report a decline in memory or cognitive function.
- Objective cognitive impairment: The education-adjusted score on the Taiwanese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-T) is between 20 and 23. One point is added to the total MoCA-T score for individuals with less than 12 years of education. Considering the heterogeneity in education levels among Taiwan's older generation, if a participant has 6 or fewer years of education (elementary school or below) or is illiterate, the Chinese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Basic (MoCA-B) will be administered as a supplement. This is to reduce false-positive interference on the visuospatial and executive function subtests caused by a low educational level.
- Preserved activities of daily living: The score on the Compensatory Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL-C) scale ranges from 1.34 to 3.06, indicating that the participant possesses the ability to live independently and has not reached the level of dementia.
In addition to the age and cognitive requirements, participants across all three groups must meet the following inclusion criteria:
- Right-handed, with an Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (EHI) score > 40;
- Table tennis beginners who have never received professional table tennis instruction;
- Played table tennis less than once a month in the past year;
- Normal hearing and normal or corrected-to-normal vision.
Exclusion criteria include:
- Over 3 years of experience in other racket sports;
- A history of neurological or psychiatric disorders;
- Any musculoskeletal system diseases that might interfere with the experiment;
- Unstable cardiopulmonary function rendering them unsuitable for moderate-intensity aerobic exercise;
- Taking medications that affect the central nervous system or blood oxygen signals, such as potent sedative-hypnotics, antiepileptic drugs, or antipsychotic medications.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Basic Science
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Young Adults - OPTIMAL
OPTIMAL theory-based instruction |
Dose: 15 blocks of practice, with each block consisting of 30 table tennis backhand strokes (Total: 450 trials). Description: The intervention integrates three components: (1) Autonomy Support (AS): Participants choose the color of the table tennis balls. (2) Enhanced Expectancy (EE): A visual illusion is used where the target is surrounded by smaller circles, making the target appear larger to boost confidence. (3) External Focus (EF): Instructions direct attention toward the target rather than limb movements. |
|
Active Comparator: Young Adults - Control
Conventional instruction |
Dose: Same as Experimental group (15 blocks x 30 trials; Total: 450 trials). Description: (1) No choice is provided (Yoked control). (2) A visual illusion is used where the target is surrounded by larger circles, making the target appear smaller. (3) Instructions focus on body mechanics, such as elbow position and swing path (Internal Focus). |
|
Experimental: Older Adults - OPTIMAL
OPTIMAL theory-based instruction |
Dose: 15 blocks of practice, with each block consisting of 30 table tennis backhand strokes (Total: 450 trials). Description: The intervention integrates three components: (1) Autonomy Support (AS): Participants choose the color of the table tennis balls. (2) Enhanced Expectancy (EE): A visual illusion is used where the target is surrounded by smaller circles, making the target appear larger to boost confidence. (3) External Focus (EF): Instructions direct attention toward the target rather than limb movements. |
|
Active Comparator: Older Adults - Control
Conventional instruction |
Dose: Same as Experimental group (15 blocks x 30 trials; Total: 450 trials). Description: (1) No choice is provided (Yoked control). (2) A visual illusion is used where the target is surrounded by larger circles, making the target appear smaller. (3) Instructions focus on body mechanics, such as elbow position and swing path (Internal Focus). |
|
Experimental: MCI Older Adults - OPTIMAL
OPTIMAL theory-based instruction |
Dose: 15 blocks of practice, with each block consisting of 30 table tennis backhand strokes (Total: 450 trials). Description: The intervention integrates three components: (1) Autonomy Support (AS): Participants choose the color of the table tennis balls. (2) Enhanced Expectancy (EE): A visual illusion is used where the target is surrounded by smaller circles, making the target appear larger to boost confidence. (3) External Focus (EF): Instructions direct attention toward the target rather than limb movements. |
|
Active Comparator: MCI Older Adults - Control
Conventional instruction |
Dose: Same as Experimental group (15 blocks x 30 trials; Total: 450 trials). Description: (1) No choice is provided (Yoked control). (2) A visual illusion is used where the target is surrounded by larger circles, making the target appear smaller. (3) Instructions focus on body mechanics, such as elbow position and swing path (Internal Focus). |
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Motor Performance (Accuracy Score)
Time Frame: Day 1 Pre-test: before practice (3 blocks) Acquisition: during practice (15 blocks) Post-test: immediately after practice (3 blocks) Day 2 Retention test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks) Transfer test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks)
|
Accuracy is measured with a target-centered scoring system on a 0-7 scale per ball; higher scores indicate better accuracy. 7 pts: Hit target (10 cm diameter). 6 pts: Hit zone (20 cm). 5 pts: Hit zone (30 cm). 4 pts: Hit zone (40 cm). 3 pts: Hit zone (50 cm). 2 pts: Hit opposite table surface but missed target zones. 1 pt: Ball was hit but missed the opposite table. 0 pts: Failed to hit the ball. The performance is presented by blocks. Each block contains 30 balls. The average score of each block is calculated. |
Day 1 Pre-test: before practice (3 blocks) Acquisition: during practice (15 blocks) Post-test: immediately after practice (3 blocks) Day 2 Retention test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks) Transfer test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks)
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Prefrontal Cortex (DLPFC) Activation
Time Frame: Day 1 Pre-test: before practice (3 blocks) Acquisition: during practice (15 blocks) Post-test: immediately after practice (3 blocks) Day 2 Retention test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks) Transfer test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks)
|
Change in oxygenated hemoglobin (HbO) concentration (μM) in the bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) during table tennis backhand task blocks. |
Day 1 Pre-test: before practice (3 blocks) Acquisition: during practice (15 blocks) Post-test: immediately after practice (3 blocks) Day 2 Retention test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks) Transfer test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks)
|
|
Premotor Cortex (PMC) Activation
Time Frame: Day 1 Pre-test: before practice (3 blocks) Acquisition: during practice (15 blocks) Post-test: immediately after practice (3 blocks) Day 2 Retention test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks) Transfer test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks)
|
Change in oxygenated hemoglobin (HbO) concentration (μM) in the bilateral premotor cortex (PMC), measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) during table tennis backhand task blocks. |
Day 1 Pre-test: before practice (3 blocks) Acquisition: during practice (15 blocks) Post-test: immediately after practice (3 blocks) Day 2 Retention test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks) Transfer test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks)
|
|
Supplementary Motor Area (SMA) Activation
Time Frame: Day 1 Pre-test: before practice (3 blocks) Acquisition: during practice (15 blocks) Post-test: immediately after practice (3 blocks) Day 2 Retention test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks) Transfer test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks)
|
Change in oxygenated hemoglobin (HbO) concentration (μM) in the supplementary motor area (SMA), measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) during table tennis backhand task blocks. |
Day 1 Pre-test: before practice (3 blocks) Acquisition: during practice (15 blocks) Post-test: immediately after practice (3 blocks) Day 2 Retention test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks) Transfer test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks)
|
|
Sensorimotor Cortex (SMC) Activation
Time Frame: Day 1 Pre-test: before practice (3 blocks) Acquisition: during practice (15 blocks) Post-test: immediately after practice (3 blocks) Day 2 Retention test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks) Transfer test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks)
|
Change in oxygenated hemoglobin (HbO) concentration (μM) in the sensorimotor cortex (SMC), measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) during table tennis backhand task blocks. |
Day 1 Pre-test: before practice (3 blocks) Acquisition: during practice (15 blocks) Post-test: immediately after practice (3 blocks) Day 2 Retention test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks) Transfer test: at least 24 hours after Day 1 (3 blocks)
|
|
Self-Efficacy (General Self-Efficacy Scale, GSES)
Time Frame: Day 1 Immediately after Pre-test
|
Self-efficacy is measured with the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES), a 10-item self-report scale. Each item is rated from 1 (not at all true) to 4 (exactly true), giving a total score of 10 to 40; higher scores indicate higher self-efficacy. |
Day 1 Immediately after Pre-test
|
Other Outcome Measures
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Manipulation Check
Time Frame: Day 1 After Post-test Day 2 After Transfer test
|
A questionnaire verifying whether participants perceived the assigned experimental manipulations (autonomy support, enhanced expectancies, and attentional focus). It consists of 19 items rated mainly on 0-10 scales (items 10-11 on a 0-100% scale); higher scores indicate stronger agreement or greater perception of the corresponding construct. |
Day 1 After Post-test Day 2 After Transfer test
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Estimated)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- NYCU115196AE
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.