Table 3.
Extraction table of the studies examining the neural efficiency hypothesis in experts-novices paradigm.
| References | EG Term used (mean experience yrs.) | Neurophysiological techniques | EG skill type | NEH supported? (compared to CG/Novice) | Controversies/non-significances |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Babiloni et al. (2009) | Elite (8+) | EEG | SP | Spatially selective cortical activation ↓ (low- and high-frequency alpha ERD was lower in amplitude in occipital and temporal areas and in dorsal pathways, at right hemisphere (visuo-spatial selective attention) | Both experts' hemispheres in the whole video's duration were involved for the best judgment instead of only right visuospatial hemisphere activated |
| Babiloni et al. (2010) | Elite/Amateur (12+; 2–5) | EEG | EP | Dorsal and mirror pathways (lower alpha ERD, elite < amateur < novice) | Low frequency alpha ERD/S in ventral pathway showed no difference (p > 0.10) |
| Berti et al. (2019) | Elite (14) | rs-fMRI | EP | Increase FC between the right superior parietal lobe, bilateral occipital poles, and auditory and motor-related areas (possibly driven by long-term specific training) | Increased positive correlation in occipital-parietal-temporal network with left hemisphere more prominently involved in experts |
| Costanzo et al. (2016) | Collegiate Athlete (n.r.) | fMRI | Mix | Prefrontal areas and insula demonstrated NE BOLD during exposed to unpleasant stimulus | Observed activation in the amygdala was not significant in EG and CG comparisons |
| Del Percio et al. (2008) | Elite/Elite (10+) | EEG | SP/EP | Supplementary motor and contralateral sensorimotor areas with ↓ RP and motor potentials | MP amplitude over ipsilateral sensorimotor area was higher in the karate than fencing elites; NE depends on side of the movement, hemisphere, and athlete's trait |
| Del Percio et al. (2009b) | Athlete/Athlete (n.r.) | EEG | SP/ EP | Left central, right central, middle parietal, and right parietal areas (↓ low-frequency alpha TRPD, p < 0.01); Right frontal, left central, right central, and middle parietal areas, p < 0.03 (↓ high-frequency alpha TRPD) | Alpha ERD for eyes-open referenced to -closed (upright bipodalic standing) was higher in amplitude in experts |
| Del Percio et al. (2010) | Elite Athlete (12+) | EEG | EP | Primary motor area, lateral and medial premotor areas, ps < 0.0005–0.005 (↓ high frequency alpha ERD was lower in amplitude in both preparation and execution of the right movements) | Unclear the reason of NEH was more represented in right (dominant) than left movements) |
| Del Percio et al. (2011) | Athlete (12+) | EEG | EP | Frontal (p < 0.00002), central (p < 0.008), right occipital (p < 0.02) areas (↓ low frequency alpha TRPD); frontal (p < 0.00009) and central (p < 0.01) areas (↓ high-frequency alpha TRPD) | Reduction of alpha power for eye-open to close condition (upright bipodalic standing) was greater in experts |
| Del Percio et al. (2019) | Player (12.7) | EEG | Mix | n.r. | A prominent and bilateral parietal alpha ERD was greater (p < 0.05) in experts (Low-frequency alpha sub-band: P4, p = 0.01; high-frequency alpha sub-band: C4, p = 0.01, P3, p = 0.04, P4, p = 0.002) |
| Di Russo et al. (2005) | Professional Athlete (6+) | EEG | EP | BP and NS′s components related to right finger movements had a later (p < 0.01) onset and reduced (BP, p < 0.005; NS′, p < 0.01) amplitude in the left SMA and PMA | No difference was found between expert and novice for MP and RAP |
| Duru and Assem (2018) | Elite (7+) | fMRI + EEG | EP | Frontal (alpha, p < 0.009; beta, p < 0.029), midline (alpha, p < 0.004; beta, p < 0.043), parietal occipital (alpha, p < 0.072; beta, p < 0.081), and RCT regions (alpha, p < 0.0001) ↓ ERD/S | n.r. |
| Guo et al. (2017) | Athlete (8+) | fMRI | Mix | Bilateral middle frontal gyrus; right middle orbitofrontal area, SMA, paracentral lobule, precuneus, angular gyrus; left supramarginal gyrus, inferior temporal gyrus; middle temporal gyrus, bilateral lingual gyrus and left cerebellum crus ↓ | Precuneus showed ↑ under the sports related vs. unrelated stimulus condition in experts |
| Hatta et al. (2009) | Player (16.4) | EEG | EP | Shorter BP latencies for the non-dominant handgrip task | BP onset time for non-dominant handgrip task was earlier in control (p < 0.001); MP amplitudes in experts were significantly larger (p < 0.001) than novices |
| Iwadate et al. (2005) | Collegiate Athlete (n.r.) | EEG | Mix | P300 latency was significant shorter in lower-limb task (p < 0.05) | Increased P300 amplitudes (p < 0.001) and reduced latencies during the lower-limb task (p < 0.01); larger N140 amplitudes during both the upper- and lower-limb tasks (p < 0.01); no significant (p = 0.78) difference in the upper-limb task |
| Kim et al. (2014) | Elite (17.8), Expert (11.9) | fMRI | SP | Left superior and inferior frontal areas, ventral prefrontal cortex, right SMA, right primary somatosensory area, and left precuneus, both temporoparietal areas, the left PCC, the right BG, and left cerebellar nodule and tonsil ↓ | Right SMA, MFC, the right and left temporoparietal area, and the declive and dentate of the right cerebellum ↑ in elite; ACC (similarity in activation levels between elites and novices, but not experts) |
| Kita et al. (2001) | Athlete/Athlete (n.r.) | EEG | SP/EP | MRCPs onset time were shorter (p < .01); amplitudes of BP were smaller preceding wrist extensions in the contralateral motor area (p < .01) | No significant difference in NS′ and MP amplitude between EG and CG |
| Milton et al. (2007) | Expert (n.r.) | fMRI | SP | BG (p < 0.02), LIMBIC (p < 0.0002) ↓ | Cortical regions (SPL, LPMCd, OCC) ↑ in experts |
| Naito and Hirose (2014) | Professional (16+)/Elite (9+) | fMRI | SP/Mix | The size and intensity of medial-wall activity in foot M1 ↓ (p < 0.05) both in size and strength | The size and intensity of medial-wall activity was smaller in other participants besides Neymar |
| Nakamoto and Mori (2008) | Collegiate Athlete (7-12) | EEG | Mix | Shorter (p < 0.01) interval between stimulus and LRP onset (in Go trails) | Augmented P3 amplitude, spatial-BB (p < 0.01) and color (p < 0. 05) tasks in experts in frontal (Fz) in Nogo trials |
| Olsson et al. (2008) | Elite (n.r.) | fMRI | SP | Visual and parietal cortex (superior occipital lobe and inferior parietal cortex) ↓ in CG and non-imagery trained athletes (p < 0.05). Significant left lateralization (p < 0.05) | Bilateral pre-motor cortex, SMA and Cerebellum ↑ in experts, on the right side (p < 0.05) |
| Park et al. (2020) | Elite (n.r.) | fNIRS | SP | More stable pattern of variability in hemodynamic responses (HbO, HbR, and HbT) from prefrontal cortex | No group difference in overall average HbO, HbR, and HbT responses from PFC and DLPFC |
| Qiu et al. (2019) | Athletes (6.5) | fMRI | Mix | Left FEF, MTG, bilateral aIPS in the MOT task, and core part of DAN ↓; as attentional load increased, deactivation of left MTG differences become larger between EG and CG | Left temporal ↑ in experts |
| Wang and Tu (2017) | Collegiate Athlete (5+) | EEG | Mix | Lower amounts of attentional resources of irrespective information control (smaller CNV amplitude in the condition involving low uncertainty, p = 0.018) | Greater P3 amplitudes (p = 0.01) in experts |
| Wei and Li (2017) | Experts (10) | EEG | Mix | Occipital N1 (p < 0.01); Frontal, parietal, and central P3 (p < 0.01) lower amplitude; parietal-central area alpha ERD ↓ (p < 0.01) | Frontal and central N1 and N2 (higher amplitude, p < 0.01) in experts |
| Wei and Li (2018) | Experts (10) | EEG | Mix | Occipital-parietal visual and MNS cortices theta and alpha ERP ↓ (p < 0.05); right hemisphere task region (increased effective FC); left hemisphere and inter-hemispheric region (decreased inefficient FC) | Right occipital-temporal (p < 0.05) ↑ and right frontal-temporal cortices ↑ (p < 0.01) |
| Yamashiro et al. (2015) | Collegiate Athlete (9+) | EEG | Mix | The peak latency of inhibition of movements (Nogo-N2 were shorter, p < 0.05) | Frontal area Nogo-N2 (Larger amplitude, p < 0.05) in experts; negative correlation between Nogo-N2 (r = 0.50, p < 0.05) and Nogo-P3 (r = 0.53, p < 0.01) potentials and RT |
| Yang et al. (2020) | Collegiate Athlete (3+) | rs-fMRI | Mix | Left triangular part of the IFG, extending to the opercular part of the left IFG and middle frontal gyrus (↓ gFCD, p < 0.05); positive correlation between gFCD and RT (r = 0.46, p = 0.0021) | Left superior parietal lobule and the left MFG, lower FC in experts |
| Zhang et al. (2019) | Expert (9.8–10.7) | fMRI | Mix | Left putamen, inferior parietal lobule, SMA, postcentral gyrus, right insula ↓; better temporal congruence between motor executions and motor imagery (p < 0.001); effective in the representation and the interoception of the motor sequences in volleyball (p < 0.001) and basketball (p < 0.01) experts | Experts involved more efficient motor simulation and less neural effort in performing the integrated representation of their self-sport |
↓ = decreased activation; ↑ = increased activation; Mix = The study includes the type of sport appeared both self-paced as well as externally paced characteristics, such as tennis, serving is self-paced but rally is externally paced; SP/EP = The study includes both self-paced as well as externally paced sports in either expert or novice group.