Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DOI 10.1007/s00213-005-2191-9
Received: 19 October 2004 / Accepted: 12 January 2005 / Published online: 19 February 2005
# Springer-Verlag 2005
Abstract Rationale: In everyday life, people are usually on motor parameters (absolute force, endurance time or
capable of performing two tasks simultaneously. Howev- electromyographic amplitude). Conclusions: Caffeine im-
er, in a previous study we showed that during a fatiguing proved cognitive performance. This effect also extends
motor task, cognitive performance declined progressive- under demanding situations, as was shown by the perfor-
ly. There is extensive literature on the (positive) effects of mance during the dual task, even during progressive motor
caffeine on cognitive and motor performance. These effects fatigue.
are most pronounced under suboptimal conditions, for ex-
ample during fatigue. However, little is known about the Keywords Caffeine . Cognitive performance . Fatigue .
effects of caffeine on cognitive performance during a fatigu- Dual task . Maximal voluntary contraction . Submaximal
ing motor task. Objective: This study was aimed to inves- contractions . Reaction time . Accuracy
tigate whether a moderate dose of caffeine could attenuate
the decline in cognitive performance during a fatiguing
motor task. Methods: The study consisted of a placebo and Introduction
a caffeine (3 mg/kg) session. A total of 23 subjects com-
pleted these sessions in a semi-randomized and double-blind Coffee is a widely consumed beverage and it is estimated
order. In each session, subjects performed maximal volun- that about 90% of Dutch adults drink coffee regularly
tary contractions of the index finger, a choice reaction time (Hameleers et al. 2000). Coffee contains caffeine, which is
(CRT) task and a dual task consisting of a fatiguing motor known to have stimulatory effects on the central nervous
task concomitantly with the same CRT task. After the fa- system. The stimulating effects of caffeine are predom-
tiguing dual task, the CRT task was repeated. Results: Caf- inantly caused by an antagonistic action on adenosine re-
feine improved cognitive task performance, in both the ceptors. Hence, caffeine increases the levels of several
single and dual task, as shown by decreased reaction times neurotransmitters such as dopamine, acetylcholine and se-
together with unchanged accuracy. Cognitive performance rotonine (for review, see Fredholm et al. 1999). In daily
in the dual task deteriorated with increasing fatigue. How- life, caffeine is commonly used to suppress feelings of fa-
ever, the decrease in cognitive performance in the begin- tigue. Furthermore, after caffeine consumption, subjective
ning of the dual task, as observed in the placebo condition, feelings such as increased alertness, energy and ability to
was partly prevented by caffeine administration (i.e., no concentrate are often cited. The effects of caffeine are most
increase in reaction times). We found no effects of caffeine pronounced when subjects perform under suboptimal con-
ditions, characterized by fatigue or tediousness, or in tasks
placing high demands on the information processing
system (Lieberman et al. 1986; Lorist et al. 1994; Ruijter
H. van Duinen (*) . M. M. Lorist . I. Zijdewind et al. 1999). The simultaneous execution of two tasks is
Department of Medical Physiology, University of Groningen, a condition that places high demands on the processing
Groningen, The Netherlands
e-mail: h.van.duinen@med.umcg.nl system. Several studies showed that in a cognitive dual-task
Tel.: +31-50-3638735 condition, caffeine has a positive effect on performance
Fax: +31-50-3632751 (Brice and Smith 2002; Ruijter et al. 1999).
By using a dual-task paradigm, we previously showed a
M. M. Lorist
Department of Experimental and Work Psychology, mutual interference between motor and cognitive perfor-
University of Groningen, mance during a protocol that induced progressive amounts of
Groningen, The Netherlands muscle fatigue (Lorist et al. 2002). In this study, subjects
540
below), the subjects executed an MVC after each 60-s condition, subjects received decaffeinated coffee. In the
period (see Fig. 1). caffeine condition, subjects received decaffeinated coffee
The cognitive task involved an auditory choice reaction in which caffeine (3 mg/kg body weight) was dissolved.
time (CRT) task. The stimuli (500- or 900-Hz pure tones; Subjects were allowed to use milk and/or sugar, and they
duration, 50 ms; intensity, 70 dB) were presented binau- could not distinguish between caffeinated and decaffein-
rally through speakers. Random sequences of frequent ated coffee. Since there is evidence that withdrawal effects
(70% occurrence; high probability) and infrequent (30%; may play a role in the observed caffeine effects (Rogers
low probability) stimuli were presented in blocks of 50 et al. 2003), subjects were allowed to consume one cup of
stimuli (a period lasting 60 s). The inter-tone interval coffee before 10 A.M. If they drank their morning coffee,
varied randomly between 1,100 and 1,300 ms. Subjects they had to do so on both experimental days.
responded to the auditory stimulus by pressing one of two
response buttons with the middle or index finger of their
left hand, as fast and accurately as possible. Half of the General procedure
subjects were instructed to respond with their middle finger
to frequent stimuli and with their index finger to infrequent Figure 1 shows a schematic drawing of the procedure that
stimuli. The other subjects received opposite instructions. was followed throughout both experimental sessions.
For half of the subjects in each group, 500-Hz tones were These sessions were identical except for the caffeine treat-
frequent stimuli; for the other half, these tones served as ment; the sessions were conducted at least 1 week apart.
infrequent stimuli. As a result, there were four different Each session started at 1:30 P.M., and lasted 1.52 h; a
versions of the CRT task: (1) frequent stimuli 500 Hz, session started with the participants drinking a cup of coffee
middle finger response; (2) frequent stimuli 900 Hz, middle (with or without caffeine, see Caffeine administration).
finger response; (3) frequent stimuli 500 Hz, index finger In order to attribute the influence of performing a con-
response; and (4) frequent stimuli 900 Hz, index finger current motor task on CRT performance, we started with a
response. The presentation of stimuli and the collection of single CRT task. The difference in performance between
the subjects responses were controlled by Micro Experi- the single task and the start of the dual task gives an in-
mental Laboratory Professional Software (MEL v2.0; dication of the additional demands of the motor task. The
Schneider 1988) in conjunction with the MEL Serial Re- long-term effects of fatigue were studied by repeating the
sponse Box. single CRT task. The difference in performance between
The dual task consisted of a motor task at 30% cMVC the pre- and post-fatigue CRT tasks gives an indication of
(right index finger) that was performed in combination with these long-term effects. Hence, the order of the execut-
a cognitive task (left hand; see Fig. 1). The subjects looked ed tasks was as follows:
at a dual-beam oscilloscope in front of them; one beam
(1) Practice; one block of 150 CRT stimuli was followed
continually displayed the isometric force production of the
by three blocks of 50 CRT trials (ca. 60 s), each block
subject, and the second beam indicated the desired level of
was followed by an MVC;
contraction force (30% cMVC). The task started with: (1)
(2) Three MVC measurements; this part started 45 min
the submaximal contraction at 30% cMVC maintained for
after caffeine administration;
60 s, followed by (2) an MVC for 4 s and (3) 4 s rest.
(3) Single CRT task (pre-fatigue); 14 blocks of 50 stimuli,
Concomitantly with the submaximal contraction, the sub-
each block was followed by an MVC;
jects had to execute the same CRT task described above.
(4) Dual task; a submaximal contraction combined with
This sequence [(1)(3)] was repeated until the subject
the CRT task, continued until the subject could no
could no longer maintain the target force.
longer sustain the target force level for more than 2 s.
(5) Single CRT task (post-fatigue); 14 blocks of 50 stimuli,
each block was followed by an MVC [see item (3)].
Caffeine administration
Since accurate force measurements require fixation in
Subjects completed a placebo and a caffeine session in a the experimental set-up, which would be uncomfortable for
semi-randomized and double-blind order. In the placebo
Force
Fig. 1 Schematic representation of the general procedure. Practice produced once every minute. After this task, the dual task is
and maximal voluntary contraction (MCV) measurements, which executed: a contraction at 30% cMVC in combination with the CRT
precede the single choice reaction time (CRT) task pre-fatigue, are task, followed by an MVC and 4-s rest. The dual task is followed by
not shown. During the single CRT task pre-fatigue, an MVC is the single CRT task post-fatigue
542
RT (ms)
of both the caffeine (filled
triangle) and placebo (open 325 325
square) conditions are shown,
during the single task before 275 275
fatigue, the dual-task and the
single task after fatigue 225 225
c 100
d 100
90 90
Accuracy (%)
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6 t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6
Single Fatiguing Single Single Fatiguing Single
CRT dual-task CRT CRT dual-task CRT
pre-fatigue post-fatigue pre-fatigue post-fatigue
n.s.). Subjects reacted significantly faster in the caffeine cMVC; F2,42=30.55, p<0.001). During the single CRT task
condition (29051 vs 29952 ms) without decreasing their after the fatigue test, MVC values increased approximately
accuracy (92.67.7 vs 92.47.9%). We found no interac- by 6%, indicating a small recovery from fatigue (t4: 67.7
tions between caffeine and frequency and/or time-on-task. 7.3% cMVC, t6: 74.18.9% cMVC; F2,42=53.63, p<
We also found that stimulus frequency had a significant 0.001). Caffeine affected neither the cMVC (F1,21=0.18,
effect on both reaction times and accuracy (RTs: F1,21= n.s.) nor the MVC values during the CRT tasks (F1,21=
286.16, p<0.001; accuracy: F1,21=121.83, p<0.001). In line 0.018, n.s.). In addition, no effect of caffeine was found
with a previous study (Lorist et al. 2002), subjects re-
sponded faster and more accurately to frequent stimuli (257
32 ms, 97.81.7%) compared to infrequent stimuli (333
caffeine
38 ms, 87.27.9%). Besides stimulus frequency, time-on- 100
task also had a significant effect on reaction times; this placebo
90
effect was caused by the reaction times of t4, which were
MVC (%-cMVC)
Endurance (s)
0.97, n.s.).
400
Dual-task performance
200
During dual-task performance, the MVC values declined
significantly (see Fig. 3) (t1: 84.06.3% cMVC, t3: 46.1
11.1% cMVC; F2,42=147.10, p<0.001); this indicates that 0
fatigue was indeed induced by the submaximal motor task. 0 5 10 15 20 25
Moreover, in accordance with a previous study (Lorist Absolute target force t1 (Nm)
et al. 2002), subjects showed a significant decrease in cog-
nitive performance with increasing fatigue: reaction times Fig. 4 The relation between the (produced) target force (N m)
during t1 of the dual-task and the endurance time (s). Each point
increased and accuracy decreased progressively with time- represents data of a subject in the caffeine (filled diamond) and
on-task (RT: F2,42=23.14, p<0.001; accuracy: F2,42=30.08, placebo (open diamond) session. The correlation between force and
p<0.001). However, a significant interaction effect be- endurance was 0.397, p=0.006
tween session and session of caffeine administration was
found for reaction times (F1,21=5.52, p=0.029). This result
implies that caffeine administration improved the cogni- task differed significantly from the single CRT tasks (for
tive performance significantly in the dual task; in the caf- both RTs and accuracy: single CRT task pre-fatigue vs dual
feine condition, subjects showed faster responses (31967 task: p<0.001; dual task vs single CRT task post-fatigue:
vs 34378 ms) while maintaining their response accuracy p<0.001). However, in the dual task, performance was also
(80.717.2 vs 80.116.9%; F1,21=0.27, n.s.). We found no influenced by fatigue. Since fatigue has a deteriorating ef-
significant interactions between caffeine and stimulus fre- fect on dual task performance, the difference between the
quency and/or time-on-task. single CRT tasks and the dual task might have been caused
As expected, stimulus frequency significantly affected by fatigue. To exclude this effect of fatigue, we also com-
reaction times and accuracy. Subjects reacted faster and pared t3 of the single CRT task pre-fatigue vs t1 of the dual
more accurately to frequent stimuli than to infrequent stim- task. For reaction times, we found a significant interaction
uli (RT: 29464 vs 36962 ms; F1,21=148.06, p< 0.001; between task and caffeine (F1,21=6.46, p=0.019); that is,
accuracy: 90.110.0 vs 70.717.0%; F1,21=112.84, p<0.001). reaction times increased in the placebo condition but not
No significant effect of caffeine on the motor parameters in the caffeine condition, as can be seen in Fig. 2 (increase
was found; caffeine did not affect the amplitude of the MVC in reaction times: 1 ms in the caffeine condition, 22 ms in
values (F1,21=0.94, n.s.). Neither was the decline in MVC the placebo condition). For accuracy, there was a main
values affected by caffeine consumption (F2,42= 0.44, n.s.) effect of task (F1,21=19.90, p<0.001). This implies that,
nor the accompanying EMG values (F1,21= 0.037, n.s.; both in the caffeine and placebo conditions, accuracy was
caffeinetime interaction: F2,42=0.28, n.s.). However, in the lower in the dual task than in the pre-fatigue task (decrease
caffeine condition subjects had the tendency to produce of 6.6%), without an interaction between task and caffeine
slightly more force (30.93 vs 30.21% cMVC) during the (F1,21= 0.32, n.s.).
submaximal contraction (F1,21=3.35, p=0.081). Although
this effect was small and not significant, it could influence
the length of time at which the subjects could sustain the Discussion
fatiguing task. As shown in Fig. 4, a significant negative
correlation could be observed between absolute force at the In everyday life, motor and cognitive performance generally
start of the dual task (t1) and endurance time (r=0.378; occur together. Deterioration of cognitive functions, pro-
p=0.010). Endurance time and absolute force at the start of voked by motor fatigue, might lead to suboptimal func-
the dual task, however, were not affected by caffeine tioning in, e.g., work situations. As caffeine can improve
(F1,21=1.20, n.s.; F1,21=0.15, n.s., respectively). both cognitive and motor performance, we studied whether
caffeine also positively affects cognitive performance during
a fatiguing motor task. Indeed, the results show that caffeine
Single vs dual task performance improved cognitive performance even when the subjects
experienced motor fatigue. However, we observed no effect
Overall, cognitive performance in the dual task was inferior of caffeine on motor parameters (maximal force and en-
compared to performance in the single CRT tasks: reaction durance time).
times were longer and accuracy was lower in the dual task We found that subjects responded faster in the second
(effect of task: F2,42=45.87, p<0.001 for RT; F2,42=43.15, session than in the first session. Thus, repeating the same
p<0.001 for accuracy). Post hoc tests revealed that the dual test resulted in improved performance; subjects responded
545
faster without increasing their number of errors (see also Despite its effect on cognitive performance, caffeine had
Klapp 1995; Rabbit and Banerji 1989). This training effect no effect on motor parameters: absolute force, time course of
was observed although we did not find a time-on-task the MVCs or endurance time. One complication is that
effect in the first single task (single CRT t1t3). However, caffeine condition subjects tend to produce more force than
the fact that subjects responded faster on t4 (the first in the placebo condition. As shown by Rohmert (1960),
measurement after the dual task) showed that subjects subjects tend to become fatigued faster at higher force levels
could still improve their performance. Thus, despite a lack (see also Hunter and Enoka 2001). This could imply that in
of improvement during the experiment, a significant im- caffeine condition subjects tend to fatigue at a faster rate,
provement was seen when the test was repeated. which would consequently reduce endurance time. The dif-
The decrease in reaction times between the first and ference in force levels between the two conditions, how-
second experiments was influenced by caffeine consump- ever, was extremely small (0.72%). Thus, it is more likely
tion. Subjects who consumed caffeine in the second session that there are other and more important factors that could
were much faster in this session than in the first session, account for caffeines lack of effects on motor parameters.
while subjects who received caffeine in the first session did In this study we used 3 mg/kg, which is within the range of
not improve their reaction times. In the latter subjects, the optimal dosages as suggested in the review by Graham
accelerating effects of caffeine (first session) were obscured (2001). Moreover, it is a realistic amount of caffeine that
by the accelerating effect of practice in the second session. one would normally ingest from approximately two cups
In contrast, for the first group of subjects the accelerating of brewed coffee in the Netherlands. Some of the studies
effects of caffeine were added to the accelerating effects that show an effect of caffeine on force and endurance used
of practice in the second session. Overall, this interaction a dose of 6 mg/kg (Kalmar and Cafarelli 1999; Plaskett and
between session and session of caffeine administration Cafarelli 2001). However, in several other studies that used
showed that cognitive performance was more efficient in higher doses of caffeine, no effects were found. For ex-
the caffeine condition than in the placebo condition. The ample, in a recent study by Kalmar and Cafarelli (2004), no
positive effects of caffeine were observed for both frequent effect of caffeine (6 mg/kg) was found on maximal volun-
and infrequent stimuli. In general, the effect of caffeine is tary force or endurance time in an index finger abduction
most robust on tasks associated with attention or alertness task. Williams et al. (1987) used the dose of 7 mg/kg and
(Brice and Smith 2002; Lieberman et al. 2002; Warburton still did not find an effect on force and endurance during
1995). The accelerating effect of caffeine on reaction times a handgrip task. Lopes et al. (1983) applied 500 mg of
is consistent with this observation. In a dual-task paradigm, caffeine, but observed no effect on maximal force and
higher demands are placed on the information processing endurance time during a thumb-adduction task. In sum-
system (Wickens and Hollands 2000). Because the capac- mary, none of the studies on hand muscles found an ef-
ity of the information processing system is limited, per- fect of caffeine on the muscle force. On the other hand,
formance in one or both tasks of the dual-task paradigm studies using large muscle groups such as leg muscles did
would be expected to deteriorate. In our experiment, we show an effect of caffeine on force or endurance time (Bell
instructed our subjects to consider the motor task as the et al. 2001; Doherty 1998; Greer et al. 2000; Jackman et al.
primary task and therefore we expect to find changes in 1996; Kalmar and Cafarelli 1999; Plaskett and Cafarelli
the cognitive performance as an indication of increasing 2001; Tarnopolsky and Cupido 2000). Hence, it may be that
demands. In the placebo condition, we found a decline the intrinsic properties of the exercised muscle (group) or
in cognitive performance in the beginning of the dual task the motor task are important factors on the effect of caf-
(t3 of single CRT pre-fatigue vs t1 of dual task), indi- feine. For instance, the load upon the cardiovascular system
cating that the demands placed on the information pro- is significantly greater during exercise of large muscles
cessing system in the dual-task condition indeed exceeded (or groups) compared to small hand muscles. In addition,
the available capacity. However, in the caffeine condition the metabolic stress (e.g., lactate) after exercising hand
this decline was partially prevented, because there was no muscles will be much lower. Furthermore, evidence also
increase in reaction times in the beginning of the dual task, suggests that muscles differ in the ease with which they
indicating that caffeine did have an influence on the in- are activated maximally by the central nervous system
formation processing capacity. This result indicates that (Behm et al. 2002; Belanger and McComas 1981). Data
caffeine has an effect on the efficiency of the information obtained by Kalmar and Cafarelli (1999) suggest that the
processing system and/or the allocation of the available force increase after caffeine consumption could (partly) be
capacity. This result is consistent with the finding of en- explained by an enhancement of the central drive to the
hanced performance in a caffeine condition in experiments muscles. The fact that muscles differ in the ease with
using a cognitive dual-task paradigm (Brice and Smith which they are driven maximally implies that the effect
2002; Ruijter et al. 1999). In our study, the dual task con- of a potential enhancing stimulant, such as caffeine, also
sisted of a fatiguing motor task in combination with a varies across muscles. Since caffeine has an effect on
cognitive task. If the demands of the motor task increased several systems within the body (e.g., muscle, brain, and
during the development of fatigue, the performance on cardiovascular system), it is uncertain which effect could
the secondary cognitive task declined. However, the pos- be responsible for the apparent difference across various
itive effects of caffeine persisted, because no interaction muscles.
effect between caffeine and time-on-task was observed.
546
Furthermore, data suggest that the effect of caffeine Hameleers PA, Van Boxtel MP, Hogervorst E, Riedel WJ, Houx PJ,
consumption can vary with the time of day (Miller et al. Buntinx F, Jolles J (2000) Habitual caffeine consumption and
its relation to memory, attention, planning capacity and psy-
1995). We measured all our subjects in the early afternoon chomotor performance across multiple age groups. Hum Psy-
starting at 1.30 P.M. Data obtained by Miller et al. (1995) chopharmacol 15:573581
showed a significant effect of caffeine on force production Hunter SK, Enoka RM (2001) Sex differences in the fatigability of arm
in the morning, while no such effect was observed in af- muscles depends on absolute force during isometric contractions.
J Appl Physiol 91:26862694
ternoon or evening sessions. This may also explain why we Jackman M, Wendling P, Friars D, Graham TE (1996) Metabolic
did not find an effect of caffeine on force production. In catecholamine, and endurance responses to caffeine during in-
most of the other experiments, the investigators did not tense exercise. J Appl Physiol 81:16581663
indicate at what time of the day the experiments were Kalmar JM, Cafarelli E (1999) Effects of caffeine on neuromuscular
function. J Appl Physiol 87:801808
performed. Kalmar JM, Cafarelli E (2004) Central fatigue and transcranial
In conclusion, caffeines positive effect on cognitive per- magnetic stimulation: effect of caffeine and the confound of
formance also extends under fatigue conditions. This in- peripheral transmission failure. J Neurosci Methods 138:1526
dicates that drinking coffee (or other caffeine-containing Klapp ST (1995) Motor response programming during sample and
beverages) might prevent unfavourable situations caused by choice reaction time: the role of practice. J Exp Psychol 21:
10151027
deterioration of cognitive performance as a result of fatigue. Lane JD, Phillips-Bute BG (1998) Caffeine deprivation affects
This positive effect of caffeine is of importance in the field of vigilance performance and mood. Physiol Behav 65:171175
sports and in working situations in which subjects have to Lieberman HR, Spring BJ, Garfield GS (1986) The behavioral
make imperative decisions, as well as in situations in which effects of food constituents: strategies used in studies of
amino acids, protein, carbohydrate and caffeine. Nutr Rev 44
they are fatigued. The effects of caffeine could be due to an (Suppl):6170
enhancement of the availability and/or the allocation of the Lieberman HR, Wurtman RJ, Emde GG, Roberts C, Coviella IL
information processing capacity. (1987) The effects of low doses of caffeine on human per-
formance and mood. Psychopharmacology 92:308312
Lieberman HR, Tharion WJ, Shukitt-Hale B, Speckman KL, Tulley
Acknowledgements This work was supported under the frame- R (2002) Effects of caffeine, sleep loss, and stress on cognitive
work of the NWO Cognition Program with financial aid from the performance and mood during U.S. Navy SEAL training. Sea
Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). AirLand. Psychopharmacology 164:250261
The authors would like to thank Dr. Rob Bakels for helpful Lopes JM, Aubier M, Jardim J, Aranda JV, Macklem PT (1983)
comments on the manuscript and, Nieske Brouwer and Evelyn Effect of caffeine on skeletal muscle function before and after
Wesseling for the caffeine administration. fatigue. J Appl Physiol 54:13031305
Lorist MM, Snel J, Kok A, Mulder G (1994) Influence of caffeine
on selective attention in well-rested and fatigued subjects.
Psychophysiology 31:525534
References Lorist MM, Kernell D, Meijman TF, Zijdewind I (2002) Motor
fatigue and cognitive task performance in humans. J Physiol
Behm DG, Whittle J, Button D, Power K (2002) Intermuscle 545:313319
differences in activation. Muscle Nerve 25:236243 Miller LS, Lombardo TW, Fowler SC (1995) Caffeine and time of
Belanger AY, McComas AJ (1981) Extent of motor unit activation day effects on a force discrimination task in humans. Physiol
during effort. J Appl Physiol 51:11311135 Behav 57:11171125
Bell DG, Jacobs I, Ellerington K (2001) Effect of caffeine and Pasman WJ, van Baak MA, Jeukendrup AE, de Haan A (1995) The
ephedrine ingestion on anaerobic exercise performance. Med effect of different dosages of caffeine on endurance perfor-
Sci Sports Exerc 33:13991403 mance time. Int J Sports Med 16:225230
Brice CF, Smith AP (2002) Effects of caffeine on mood and Plaskett CJ, Cafarelli E (2001) Caffeine increases endurance and
performance: a study of realistic consumption. Psychopharma- attenuates force sensation during submaximal isometric con-
cology 164:188192 tractions. J Appl Physiol 91:15351544
Christopher G, Sutherland D, Smith A (2005) Effects of caffeine in Rabbit P, Banjeri N (1989) How does prolonged practice improve
non-withdrawn volunteers. Hum Psychopharmacol Clin Exp decision speed? J Exp Psychol Gen 118:338345
20:4753 Rogers PJ, Martin J, Smith C, Heatherley SV, Smit HJ (2003)
Doherty M (1998) The effects of caffeine on the maximal ac- Absence of reinforcing, mood and psychomotor performance
cumulated oxygen deficit and short-term running performance. effects of caffeine in habitual non-consumers of caffeine.
Int J Sport Nutr 8:95104 Psychopharmacology 167:5462
Enoka RM, Robinson GA, Kossev AR (1989) Task and fatigue Rohmert W (1960) Determination of the recovery pause for static
effects on low-threshold motor units in human hand muscle. J work of man. Int Z Angew Physiol 18:123164
Neurophysiol 62:13441359 Ruijter J, Lorist MM, Snel J (1999) The influence of different doses
Fredholm BB, Battig K, Holmen J, Nehlig A, Zvartau EE (1999) of caffeine on visual task performance. J Psychophysiol 13:37
Actions of caffeine in the brain with special reference to factors 48
that contribute to its widespread use. Pharmacol Rev 51:83133 Schneider W (1988) Micro experimental laboratory: an integrated
Fuglevand AJ, Zackowski KM, Huey KA, Enoka RM (1993) Im- system for IBM-PC compatibles. Behav Res Meth Instrum
pairment of neuromuscular propagation during human fatiguing Comput 20:206217
contractions at submaximal forces. J Physiol 460:549572 Streufert S, Satish U, Pogash R, Gingrich D, Landis R, Roache J,
Graham TE (2001) Caffeine and exercise: metabolism, endurance Severs W (1997) Excess coffee consumption in simulated
and performance. Sports Med 31:785807 complex work settings: detriment or facilitation of perfor-
Greer F, Friars D, Graham TE (2000) Comparison of caffeine and mance? J Appl Psychol 82:774782
theophylline ingestion: exercise metabolism and endurance. Tarnopolsky M, Cupido C (2000) Caffeine potentiates low fre-
J Appl Physiol 89:18371844 quency skeletal muscle force in habitual and nonhabitual caf-
feine consumers. J Appl Physiol 89:17191724
547
van Duinen H, Lorist MM, Zijdewind I (2003) The effect of caffeine Wilcox RR, Keselman HJ, Muska J, Cribbie R (2000) Repeated
on motor fatigue and cognitive performance in humans. Soc measures ANOVA: some new results on comparing trimmed
Neurosci Abstr 515.28 means and means. Br J Math Stat Psychol 53:6982
Warburton DM (1995) Effects of caffeine on cognition and mood Williams JH, Barnes WS, Gadberry WL (1987) Influence of caffeine
without caffeine abstinence. Psychopharmacology 119:6670 on force and EMG in rested and fatigued muscle. Am J Phys
Warburton DM, Bersellini E, Sweeney E (2001) An evaluation of a Med 66:169183
caffeinated taurine drink on mood, memory and information Yeomans MR, Ripley T, Davies LH, Rusted JM, Rogers PJ (2002)
processing in healthy volunteers without caffeine abstinence. Effects of caffeine on performance and mood depend on the
Psychopharmacology 158:322328 level of caffeine abstinence. Psychopharmacology 164:241249
Wickens CD, Hollands JG (2000) Engineering Psychology and Zijdewind I, Kernell D (1994) Index finger position and force of the
Human Performance. Prentice-Hall, NJ, USA human first dorsal interosseus and its ulnar nerve antagonist.
J Appl Physiol 77:987997
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.