Mathieu Tremblay1,2, Martin Lavallière3,4,5, Wayne J Albert1, Simon R Boudreau2, Michel J Johnson2. 1. a Occupational Performance Lab, Faculty of Kinesiology , University of New Brunswick , Fredericton , New Brunswick , Canada. 2. b École de kinésiologie et de loisir , Université de Moncton , Moncton , New Brunswick , Canada. 3. c Module de Kinésiologie, Département des Sciences de la Santé , Université du Québec à Chicoutimi (UQAC) , Saguenay , Quebec , Canada. 4. d Laboratoire de recherche biomécanique & neurophysiologique en réadaptation neuro-musculo-squelettique (Lab BioNR) , UQAC , Saguenay , Quebec , Canada. 5. e Centre de recherche, Charles-Le Moyne, Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean sur les innovations en santé (CRCSIS) , Quebec , Canada.
Abstract
Background: It is documented that male athletes display riskier behaviors while driving (as well as in life in general) than female athletes and nonathletes. However, the literature has reported that athletes show better driving ability than nonathletes. This paradox between behaviors and abilities motivated the present study to further understand the collision risk of varsity athletes. Objective: The current study estimates the performance differences between varsity male soccer players and male undergraduate nonathletes on (1) a driving task and (2) three perceptual-cognitive tasks (associated with collision risk prediction; i.e., Useful Field of View [UFOV] test). Methods: Thirty-five male undergraduate students (15 varsity soccer players, 20 undergraduate nonathletes) took part in this study. Driving performance was assessed during 14 min of urban commuting using a driving simulator. While completing the simulated driving task and UFOV test, the physiological responses were monitored using an electrocardiograph (ECG) to document heart rate variability (HRV). Results: Varsity soccer players showed more risky behaviors at the wheel compared to their nonathlete student peers. Varsity soccer players spent more time over the speed limit, committed more driving errors, and adopted fewer safe and legal behaviors. However, no difference was observed between both groups on driving skill variables (i.e., vehicle control, vehicle mobility, ecodriving). For subtests 1 and 2 of the UFOV (i.e., processing speed, divided attention), both groups performed identically (i.e., 17 ms). The nonathlete group tended to perform better on the selective attention task (i.e., subtest 3 of UFOV test; 63.2 ± 6.2 ms vs. 87.2 ± 10.7 ms, respectively; this difference was not significant, P = .76). Conclusion: Preventive driving measures should be enforced in this high-risk population to develop strategies for risk reduction in male team athletes.
Background: It is documented that male athletes display riskier behaviors while driving (as well as in life in general) than female athletes and nonathletes. However, the literature has reported that athletes show better driving ability than nonathletes. This paradox between behaviors and abilities motivated the present study to further understand the collision risk of varsity athletes. Objective: The current study estimates the performance differences between varsity male soccer players and male undergraduate nonathletes on (1) a driving task and (2) three perceptual-cognitive tasks (associated with collision risk prediction; i.e., Useful Field of View [UFOV] test). Methods: Thirty-five male undergraduate students (15 varsity soccer players, 20 undergraduate nonathletes) took part in this study. Driving performance was assessed during 14 min of urban commuting using a driving simulator. While completing the simulated driving task and UFOV test, the physiological responses were monitored using an electrocardiograph (ECG) to document heart rate variability (HRV). Results: Varsity soccer players showed more risky behaviors at the wheel compared to their nonathlete student peers. Varsity soccer players spent more time over the speed limit, committed more driving errors, and adopted fewer safe and legal behaviors. However, no difference was observed between both groups on driving skill variables (i.e., vehicle control, vehicle mobility, ecodriving). For subtests 1 and 2 of the UFOV (i.e., processing speed, divided attention), both groups performed identically (i.e., 17 ms). The nonathlete group tended to perform better on the selective attention task (i.e., subtest 3 of UFOV test; 63.2 ± 6.2 ms vs. 87.2 ± 10.7 ms, respectively; this difference was not significant, P = .76). Conclusion: Preventive driving measures should be enforced in this high-risk population to develop strategies for risk reduction in male team athletes.