Back to all available

An Exploratory Study of Prefrontal Cortex Activation Related to Golf Putting Performance Under Psychological Pressure: A Functional Near-infrared Spectroscopy Approach

neuroscience
psychiatry-and-psychology

Abstract

Neurofeedback (NF) is a promising method for helping individuals overcome choking under pressure. Identifying relevant neural biomarkers is crucial for developing effective NF. In this exploratory study, we aimed to investigate changes in prefrontal hemodynamic signals associated with golf-putting performance under psychological pressure using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Participants engaged in a one-on-one golf-putting task against an experimenter, with monetary rewards introduced to induce psychological pressure. This manipulation successfully elicited psychological pressure, leading to impaired performance in some participants. Based on performance changes between the practice and competition sessions, participants were categorized into a non-choking group (performance improved) and a choking group (performance declined). Statistical analysis revealed significantly greater increases in prefrontal activation from practice to competition in the non-choking group than in the choking group, especially in the left superior frontal gyrus. Furthermore, a trend toward a correlation between brain activation in this region and putting performance was observed. These findings suggest that the left superior frontal gyrus may serve as a promising biomarker for NF interventions aimed at mitigating choking under pressure.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].