Motor expertise and performance in sport-specific priming tasks: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to summarize findings relevant to the influence of motor expertise on performance in sport-specific priming tasks and to examine potential moderators of this effect. METHODOLOGY: Data were collected from the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), PsychInfo, Medline, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Baidu Scholar and Sport Discus and Dissertation Abstracts Online databases from January 1999 to April 2020, supplemented by manual bibliographies and meeting minutes. Stata software was used to perform the meta-analysis. Study quality was evaluated systematically using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Standard mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs were calculated with a random-effects model. The Cochrane Q test and I(2) statistic were used to evaluate heterogeneity. Begg funnel plots and Egger tests were conducted to assess publication bias. RESULTS: Nine articles (including 12 studies) were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. Significant heterogeneity was observed among these studies (Q = 44.42, P < 0.001, I(2) = 75.2%) according to random-effects modeling. The results showed an overall advantage in favor of motor experts in sport-specific priming tasks (SMD = −1.01, 95% CI [−1.41 to −0.61]). However, the magnitude of that effect was moderated by sport type (interceptive sports/independent sports) and prime stimulus type (subliminal stimulus/supraliminal stimulus). No publication bias was detected by the Begg and Egger tests. CONCLUSIONS: In general, compared with those of nonexperts, the responses of motor experts’ responses to a target stimulus are easier and faster when the prime and target stimuli are consistent. However, the magnitude of this effect is moderated by sport type and prime stimulus type.