Effect of Caffeinated Gum on Choice Reaction Time

Le résumé fourni par la source

Caffeine ingestion is a common practice for individuals seeking to feel more awake or trying to improve performance. Rather than consuming caffeinated drinks, a more recent trend is that of chewing caffeinated gum. Published research in this area, particularly in support of benefits to fine motor performance, is limited. PURPOSE: To determine if chewing Military Energy Gum (MEG, MarketRight Inc, Plano, IL) compared to a placebo can improve choice reaction time (CRT, MOART System, Lafayette, IN) under rested and fatigued conditions. METHODS: Twenty-two (12 males, 10 females), college-aged (mean + SD: 21 + 1.1 yrs; 1.73 + 0.10 m in ht; 74.6 + 14.18 kg in wt), volunteers participated in a double-blind, cross-over, placebo-based study. All subjects completed an IRB consent form. Subjects were asked to be available for testing on two non-consecutive days, for one hour. Prior to each testing period, subjects fasted from food for 7 hours and abstained from alcohol for 24 hours. Upon arrival the first day, subjects completed a brief health assessment survey, performed the CRT and the Wingate cycling power (WCP) test. Subjects performed the CRT (pre-gum CRT), were given two pieces of either 200 mg caffeinated MEG (cMEG) or placebo MEG (pMEG), chewed the gum for ten minutes, and again performed the CRT (post-gum CRT), completed the WCP test, and did CRT for third time (post-gum WCP). A mixed-methods ANOVA was conducted to determine if a group (MEG, placebo) by time (pre-gum, post-gum, post-WCP) interaction on choice reaction time existed. Significance was established at p < 0.05. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant interaction between group and time. However, CRT for the cMEG improved significantly from pre-gum (0.544 + .09 sec) to post-gum (0.504 + .07 sec), and pre-gum to post-Wingate (M = .483 + .08 sec). CONCLUSION: When compared to a placebo, caffeinated MEG did not significantly improve choice reaction time of college-aged participants under rested or fatigued conditions. Yet, choice reaction timing did show an improving trend during the sequential testing.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.