BJMB
Brazilian Journal of Motor Behavior
Research Article
!
Ribeiro et al.
2021
VOL.15
N.2
127 of 136
Manipulation of task constraints on throwing of amateur handball athletes
GABRIEL A. RIBEIRO
1
| PEDRO H. B. F. SPINOLA
1
| HELGA T.TUCCI
1
| RAQUEL P. CARVALHO
1
1
Federal University of Sao Paulo (Unifesp), Department of Human Movement Science, Santos, SP, Brazil.
Correspondence to:!Raquel de Paula Carvalho. Av. Ana Costa, 95, Vila Mathias - 11060-001 – Santos-SP, Brazil.
email: carvalho.raquel@unifesp.br
https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v15i2.198
HIGHLIGHTS
• Handball players adjusted their throwing
according to the demands of accuracy and
speed.
• The adaptation of the task happens from the
cocking to the acceleration phase of the throw.
• Preparatory adjustments may influence the
transfer of energy to the ball.
ABBREVIATIONS
AAS Angulus acromialis of the scapula
ACP Acromion process
AIS Angulus inferior of the scapula
BMI Body Mass Index
C7 Spinous process of the 7
th
cervical vertebra
LEH Lateral epicondyles of the
humerus
LPS Left posterior superior iliac spines
RPS Rigth posterior superior iliac
spines
USP Ulnar styloid processes
PUBLICATION DATA
Received 21 09 2020
Accepted 22 02 2021
Published 01 06 2021
BACKGROUND: In handball, speed and accuracy are essential characteristics for the performance of throwing.
AIM: To verify the effects of manipulation of task constraints during the throws on kinematic variables in amateur
handball players.
METHOD: 18 amateur handball players (18-27 years) made 10 throws to the target with a focus on speed and 10
throws with a focus on accuracy. The kinematic analysis of the throwing was performed, and the Student's t-test
was used.
RESULTS: Greater velocity, and hand, acromion, and iliac spines trajectories for throws with a focus on speed in
cocking phase was observed. During the acceleration phase, there was greater velocity, and trajectory of the
right upper posterior iliac spine, and less time and hand, acromion, and left upper posterior iliac spines
trajectories for throws with a focus on speed. The throw with a focus on speed showed greater shoulder and
elbow angles at the beginning, and greater elbow angle at the end of throwing.
CONCLUSION: The manipulation in the focus of the throw influenced the movement strategy from the cocking
phase to the acceleration phase according to the movement intentionality, with most of the variables presenting
greater values in the throw with a focus on speed.
KEYWORDS: Handball | Overarm | Motor control | Kinematics
INTRODUCTION
Handball is a team sport that involves the use of defensive and offensive actions,
such as lateral displacements, markings, blocks, ball passes, feint, receptions, and
throws.
1
The need to improve technical actions is evident at all levels of performance in
this sport, especially in professional practice. Among the offensive actions that are part of
the fundamentals of the sport is throwing, one of the most important actions for
characterizing shots to the goal.
2
Several variables make up the throw and determine the
different motor strategies that directly influence the performance of handball players, such
as the demand for greater speed or accuracy.
3
Speed and accuracy are essential characteristics of throws by handball athletes. It
is known that the higher the speed of the ball, the lower the accuracy for hitting the target.
4
However, trained sportsmen can throw the ball accurately at a speed that corresponds to
85% of the speed achieved in shots that prioritize speed.
3
When the focus of throws was
on the accuracy, the speed of the ball and body segments (wrist, elbow, shoulder, and hip)
was reduced in experienced handball players, although the timing of movements of body
BJMB! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Research Article!
Brazilian(Journal(of(Motor(Behavior!
Ribeiro et al.
2021
VOL.15
N.2
128 of 136
segments had not changed.
5
Accurate throws require coordinated movements of the torso
and upper limb, with great variability in speed, magnitude, and trajectory of the movement
so that adjustments are made to hit the target.
6
Fast throws require greater linear shoulder
speed, range of motion of the upper and lower torso, and rotation speed of the lower
torso.
7
Considering that trained handball players change speed, magnitude, and trajectory
of body segments during the movements and that they unaltered movement time when
instructions changed, it is not clear if these changes in the movement happen in cocking,
acceleration, or both phases of throwing when the focus is on speed or accuracy.
Changes in task demands, such as throwing with a focus on accuracy and on
speed, can be explained by the Dynamic System Approach, which considers the individual,
environment, and the task as factors that influence the adopted motor strategy.
8
Thus, it is
expected that this study will contribute to the understanding of some movement strategies
concerning the upper extremity in the face of manipulations in the restrictions of the task
for a group of individuals who train to throw in the context of amateur sports. Therefore, the
study aimed to verify the effects of manipulation of task constraints during the throws on
kinematic variables in amateur handball players during the execution of throws with a
focus on speed and accuracy. This study hypothesized that amateur players would have a
greater mean velocity and angles amplitude in the throw with a focus on speed than in the
throw with a focus on accuracy.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Eighteen male amateur handball players, with a mean age of 23.44 years
(SD=2.87), a mean body mass of 79.56kg (SD=8.69), a mean height of 1.80m (SD=0.07),
and a mean of Body Mass Index (BMI) of 24.63kg/m
2
(SD=2.27), participated in this cross-
sectional study with a non-probabilistic sample. The mean frequency of training was 1.85
days per week (SD=1.18,) during 1.575 hours per day of training (SD=0.41), resulting in a
mean of weekly training volume of 3.2 hours (SD=3.07). Inclusion criteria were male
amateurs players between 18 and 30 years old; right-handed; with a normal and painless
range of motion of the shoulder, elbow, and wrist joints; body mass index (BMI) lower or
equal to 29.9 kg/m
2
; handball practice of at least 6 months; training frequency at least once
a week for one and a half hour. Exclusion criteria were history of surgery, injury or
dysfunction in the shoulder complex; injury in the lower limbs that compromised the
maintenance of orthostatic posture; subluxation of glenohumeral joint; rheumatoid,
degenerative, or neurological disease, diabetes mellitus, fibromyalgia, or uncontrolled
hypertension. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee on Research (reference
3.411.617), and participants signed an Informed Consent Form previously to the
experiment.
For kinematic analysis, the same researcher prepared all participants fixing 10mm
diameter reflective spherical markers in anatomical references on the right hemibody:
acromion process (ACP), lateral epicondyles of the humerus (LEH), ulnar styloid processes
(USP), spinous process of the 7
th
cervical vertebra (C7), angulus acromialis of the scapula
(AAS), angulus inferior of the scapula (AIS), right and left posterior superior iliac spines
(RPS and LPS).
Participants stayed in standing positions within the calibrated volume (1.082 x
1.837 x 0.976 m
3
), and three meters away from a one-meter-diameter target
9
composed of
BJMB! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Research Article!
Brazilian(Journal(of(Motor(Behavior!
Ribeiro et al.
2021
VOL.15
N.2
129 of 136
five concentric circles with a radius equivalent to 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 cm, which height
was adjusted according to the participant’s height. This target was used to give visual
information about the throw with a focus on accuracy and a throw with a focus on speed.
The projectile used was a tennis ball of about 100g in mass and 21 cm in the perimeter.
9
The distance between the target and the calibrated volume space was 3 meters. A
handball ball was not used because we would like to use a previously published and
appropriate tool to assess throws to the target. We, therefore, found the task used in this
study and, to keep its properties, we used the tennis ball.
Two different types of throws performed with the dominant upper extremity were
assessed: throw with a focus on accuracy and throw with a focus on speed. Participants
received different instructions to throw the ball in the target for each type of throwing. We
instructed participants to perform the throw of speed throwing the ball with their maximum
speed and strength, and with no concerns in which part of the target the ball would hit it.
To perform the throw of accuracy, we instructed participants to throw the ball in the center
of the target with no instruction about how much speed and strength they should use to
perform it. Because the target was different between throws with a focus on accuracy and
speed, the rate of hit was not calculated. Participants were allowed to perform two
attempts of each throw as a familiarization procedure before the data collection.
Furthermore, participants were instructed to remain within the 80 cm x 100 cm area
delimited on the floor. Each participant performed 10 throws with a focus on accuracy and
10 throws with a focus on speed, with a 10-minute rest period between the types of throws.
Participants began performing throws with a focus on accuracy followed by performing
throws with a focus on speed because we observed in the pilot studies that the motor
strategies used in the throw with a focus on accuracy were influenced when players
performed previously the throw with a focus on speed.
Four cameras SONY™ (model DCR-sx21), with a frequency of acquisition of 60
Hz, coupled on adjustable tripods were used in this experiment. High and distance of
cameras were adjusted according to the experiment to give a reliable and accurate
sampling of data. Two cameras were placed on the right side and two cameras were
placed behind the participant to film the experiment. A LED light trigger was used as a
synchronizer and it was activated for each verbal command to ensure the subsequent
synchronization between the cameras.
Images were analyzed frame by frame using the software Dvideow 5.0™. The
kinematic data were filtered using a fifth-order Butterworth filter with a cutoff frequency of 6
Hz, and the kinematic variables were calculated using the software Matlab™ R2014a.
Kinematic variables were calculated between the start and the end of cocking and
acceleration phases of the throw. The cocking phase starts from rest and ends at the
greatest angle of shoulder elevation and smallest angle of elbow flexion; the acceleration
phase begins at the end of the cocking phase and ends when the ball is released.
7
The hand trajectory was determined as the path taken by the styloid process
marker between the beginning and the end of the movement in each phase. Movement
time was calculated as the difference in time(s) between the beginning and the end of each
phase of throws. Mean velocity was calculated from the ratio between the norm of distance
traveled by the styloid process marker and the movement time. Acromion, RPS, and LPS
trajectories were determined as the path taken by the ACP, RPS, and LPS markers
between the beginning and the end of the movement in each phase, respectively. Shoulder
angles (C7/ACP/LEH) and elbow angles (ACP/LEH/USP) were calculated using the
BJMB! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Research Article!
Brazilian(Journal(of(Motor(Behavior!
Ribeiro et al.
2021
VOL.15
N.2
130 of 136
landmarks necessary to obtain internal angles. RPS/ACP was calculated as the ratio
between RPS and ACP trajectories, as LPS/ACP as a ratio between LPS and ACP
trajectories. The closer to 0, the bigger was the dissociation between the pelvic and
scapular girdles.
The normality of the data was tested using the Shapiro-Wilk test. The Paired
Samples t-Tests were performed for kinematics variables in cocking and acceleration
phases to compare throws with a focus on speed and accuracy. Effect size values were
calculated by Cohen’s d. SPSS-19 statistical software was used for all analyses, adopting
a significance level of 5%.
RESULTS
For the cocking phase, hand trajectory (p=0.004; d=0.4), mean velocity (p<0.001;
d=0.06), acromion trajectory (p<0.001; d=0.1), LPS trajectory (p<0.001; d=0.1) and RPS
trajectory (p<0.001; d=0.1) were greater for throw with a focus on speed than for throw
with a focus on accuracy. There were no significant differences for the movement time
(p=0.102; d=0.03), LPS/ACP (p=0.066; d=0.1) and the RPS/ACP (p=0.082; d=0.1)
variables (table 1).
For the acceleration phase, mean velocity (p<0.001; d=0.3), RPS trajectory
(p=0.010; d=0.1), and RPS/ACP (p=0.041; d=0.08) were greater for throw with a focus on
speed while movement time (p = 0.003) was greater for the throw with a focus on accuracy.
There were no significant differences for hand trajectory (p=0.102; d=0.07), acromion
trajectory (p=0.121; d=0.06), LPS trajectory (p=0.054; d=0.06), and LPS/ACP (p=0.198;
d=0.04).
The shoulder angle was greater (p=0.005; d=0.04) at the beginning of the cocking
phase of the throw with a focus on speed compared to the throw with a focus on accuracy.
There were no differences in the shoulder angles in the transition of phases (p=0.136;
Table 1 – Mean and standard deviation of kinematic variables obtained from the cocking and the acceleration phases of throws of
accuracy and speed.
Variable
Cocking phase
Acceleration phase
Throw with
focus on
Accuracy
Throw with focus
on Speed
Throw with focus
on Accuracy
Throw with
focus on Speed
Hand trajectory (m)
1.17 (0.25)
1.60 (0.52)*
0.84 (0.19)
0.95 (0.16)
Movement time (s)
0.79 (0.25)
0.89 (0.36)
0.22 (0.06)**
0.15 (0.06)
Mean velocity (m/s)
1.61 (0.52)
1.99 (0.68)*
3.96 (1.07)
6.82 (1.13)**
Acromion trajectory (m)
0.37 (0.16)
0.67 (0.34)*
0.26 (0.07)
0.31 (0.08)
LPS trajectory (m)
0.24 (0.10)
0.37 (0.10)*
0.07 (0.04)
0.09 (0.04)
RPS trajectory (m)
0.22 (0.08)
0.33 (0.08)*
0.06 (0.03)
0.09 (0.04)**
LPS/ACP
0.69 (0.19)
0.65 (0.17)
0.24 (0.12)
0.28 (0.10)
RPS/ACP
0.64 (0.21)
0.60 (0.18)
0.22 (0.11)
0.30 (0.10)**
LPS: left posterior superior iliac spines; RPS: right posterior superior iliac spines; *: differences between throw with a focus on
accuracy and throw with a focus on speed during Cocking phase (p ≤ 0.05); **: differences between throw with a focus on
accuracy and throw with a focus on speed during Acceleration phase (p ≤ 0.05); LPS/ACP: ratio between LPS and ACP;
RPS/ACP: ratio between RPS and ACP.
BJMB! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Research Article!
Brazilian(Journal(of(Motor(Behavior!
Ribeiro et al.
2021
VOL.15
N.2
131 of 136
d=0.03) and at the end of the acceleration phase (p=0.591; d=0.01) between accuracy and
speed throws (figure 1a).
Figure 1. Mean and standard deviation of the shoulder (a) and elbow (b) angles at the beginning of the
cocking phase, between phases, and at the end of the acceleration phase for accuracy and speed throws.
The elbow angle was greater at the beginning of the cocking phase (p=0.01;
d=0.03) for the throw with a focus on accuracy, and at the end of the acceleration phase
(p=0.02; d=0.06) for the throw with a focus on speed. There was no difference in the elbow
angle in the transition of phases (p=0.413; d=0.01) between accuracy and speed throws
(figure 1b).
DISCUSSION
(a)
(b)
*: difference between throw with a focus on accuracy and throw with a focus on speed (p≤0.05)
Beginning
Shoulder angle (degrees)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Transition
End
Accuracy
Speed
*
*
*
Elbow angle (degrees)
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
Beginning
Transition
End
Accuracy
Speed
BJMB! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Research Article!
Brazilian(Journal(of(Motor(Behavior!
Ribeiro et al.
2021
VOL.15
N.2
132 of 136
The study aimed to verify the effects of manipulation of task constraints during the
throws on kinematic variables in amateur handball players. The main findings of this study
showed that the manipulation of task constraints influenced the movement strategy from
the cocking phase to the acceleration phase of throwing. In the cocking phase, results
presented greater velocity, and hand, acromion, and iliac spines trajectories for throws with
a focus on speed. In the acceleration phase, there were greater velocity and right upper
posterior iliac spine trajectory, and less time and hand, acromion, and left upper posterior
iliac spines trajectories for throws with a focus on speed. At the beginning of the movement,
the players adopted different body positions between throws, with a greater range of
motion of the torso and shoulder observed in the throw with a focus on speed. Moreover,
to perform the throw with a focus on speed, players adjusted the upper extremity in a
posture that required greater shoulder and elbow angles. It is suggested that differences
between postures of the upper extremity are the result of different demands for attention
and muscle tone for each throw, generating different preparatory adjustments between the
throws of accuracy and speed result in different kinematic parameters of velocity, time, and
trajectory of body segments.
The verbal command used in the throw with a focus on speed (“With all your
strength, anywhere in the target!”) possibly influenced the preparation of movement to
generate greater strength and speed in its execution, which was confirmed by the results
regarding the mean velocity. The verbal command was associated with strength because
although speed and strength are different parameters, they are directly interrelated. Verbal
stimulation is commonly used for tests that require a high level of applied force and speed
and there is an increase in strength performance of trained individuals who were subjected
to verbal stimuli during the task.
10
Studies verified lower speed when the focus was in
accuracy when compared with a focus on speed,
3,5
and the change in the way the task
information was communicated had influence in the execution of the movement.
11
In the cocking phase, the trajectory of the hand in the throw with a focus on speed
was greater compared to the throw with a focus on accuracy. Greater hand trajectory in the
cocking phase implies a greater range of motion of the torso and shoulder. Consequently,
there will be a greater potential stored energy transferred to the acceleration phase
resulting in greater ball thrust.
12
During the analysis of filming footage of the throwing, it is
evident that there is a greater involvement of the whole body, observed by the greater
trajectory of the acromion and iliac spines, with the purpose of increasing the energy
transferred to the ball. It was also possible to observe a greater displacement of the
participant’s upper extremity backward in the throwing with a focus on speed, which can be
a strategy adopted to establish greater balance, as well as to ensure greater momentum
and, consequently, transfer of force to the ball.
13
There was no difference for the LPS/ACR and RPS/ACR ratios between the
throws in the cocking phase, and the results indicated that during this phase, the shoulder
showed greater movement in relation to the hip for both types of the throw. The greater the
distance from the hand to the shoulder, the greater the distance between the object and
the axis of rotation and, consequently, the greater the object's speed for the same torque
application.
12,13
It is suggested that the torso rotation strategy is used regardless of
whether the focus of the throw is on accuracy or strength.
It is known that greater range shoulder and elbow motion results in greater
muscular torque when the weight force vector position is farther from the longitudinal
BJMB! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Research Article!
Brazilian(Journal(of(Motor(Behavior!
Ribeiro et al.
2021
VOL.15
N.2
133 of 136
shoulder axis.
14
It was expected that during the throwing with a focus on speed, players
would present a greater angle of shoulder and elbow in the transition between cocking and
acceleration phases of the throw, to increase the distance of the axis of rotation, the force
exerted and the velocity of the ball. The opposite was expected for the throw with a focus
on accuracy. However, no statistical difference was found between the types of throw for
the shoulder and elbow angles in the transition. Study shows that experienced players
used what is called as “a single throwing technique” for both throws with focus on accuracy
and speed because players did not change the relative timing of movement initiation of
different body segments.
4
Results of the present study complement this statement and
indicate that the adaptation of the task happened at the beginning of the cocking phase
and throughout its execution, with no significant differences in the transition phase. It is
suggested that players preserved some essential elements of the movement, which
characterize it as a mature throwing pattern, regardless of whether the task demands
accuracy or speed.
During the acceleration phase, there was no difference in the hand and acromion
trajectories between the throws. It can be inferred that, even with the instruction to throw
with maximum speed and strength, hitting the target requires some level of accuracy.
Studies showed that experienced players can throw the ball accurately at higher speeds
even if the focus was on throwing as fast as possible and they had more consistent
performance when throws velocity was near to maximum force production.
3,5
In images it
was evident that players selected the whip-throw pattern of movement. The whip-throw has
a lower trajectory, angular momentum, and final linear velocity than the circular throw.
15
The circular throw requires a smaller amplitude of shoulder circumduction and expresses a
linear component in the acceleration phase, allowing the ball to move towards the target
with greater efficiency, but with less velocity. The results of our study show that the
similarity of the shoulder and elbow angles between the types of throw in the phase
transition are important indicators that there was no difference in the shoulder
circumduction between them. However, there was a greater extension of the elbow at the
end of the acceleration for the throw with a focus on speed as a strategy to transfer greater
potential energy to the ball.
13
Despite the similarities in the trajectory of the hand and the shoulder angles in the
acceleration phase, the throw with a focus on speed had greater velocity and a shorter
duration of the movement. It can be inferred that some differences between throws with a
focus on accuracy or speed were found because phases were analyzed separately. An
example is the timing movement that was similar between throws in previous studies.
3,5
In
addition, there was a greater trajectory of the right superior posterior iliac spine and a
higher RPS/ACR ratio, indicating a greater pelvis movement in the acceleration phase in
the throw with a focus on speed. When analyzing different strategies involving acceleration
of the pelvis and trunk, significant results regarding ball speed and center of mass speed
were found.
2
Therefore, in the throw with a focus on speed, the right hip uses the left hip as
the axis of rotation to amplify the transfer of energy from the lower to the upper limbs. This
information has an important relationship with the movement pattern of high-performance
athletes for the acceleration phase. There exists evidence that there is a proximal-distal
sequence at maximum angular velocities, starting with the movement of the proximal
articulation of the pelvis rotation,
16,17,18,19
which has an important influence on improving
handball pitch performance.
BJMB! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Research Article!
Brazilian(Journal(of(Motor(Behavior!
Ribeiro et al.
2021
VOL.15
N.2
134 of 136
The different ways of accounting for the correctness between tasks, in the center
of the target when the focus was in accuracy and the entire target when the focus was on
speed, were important restrictions of the task to provoke different stimuli and throwing
strategies. Moreover, the ball and target were smaller than those that players used to train
and it is a movement pattern different from the trained one. Performance of the accuracy
task may have a negative influence on handball training, as some strategies adopted for
this type of pitch express a greater relationship with the ball's speed, in comparison with
the accuracy throw. A task that requires maximum speed would be similar to a shot put,
and maximum accuracy is exemplified by the throw of darts. Thus, the two types of throw
of this research applied different demands over the upper extremity, which influenced the
movement strategies of amateur players, and not as a task that requires maximum speed
and/or maximum accuracy.
Our study has strengths, such as the analysis of the cocking and acceleration
phases separately which allowed insights about the influence of different focus on throws.
Additionally, it was provided not only verbal but also visual instruction because success in
action was different in accuracy and speed tasks. For throws with a focus on accuracy, the
success was counted when the ball touched the center of the target whereas in the throw
with a focus on speed was when the ball touched any place of the target. It also identified
some limitations. The biomechanics model used for 3D-reconstruction did not allow us to
calculate angles in all planes of trunk, shoulder, and elbow movements, as well as wrist
angles. However, we believe that it did not constrain our insights according to the focus of
this study. Because the target was outside the calibration volume, it was not possible to
analyze random error and precision which could be interesting to confirm how accurate
amateur handball players are in this specific task. The determination of space for the
execution of the throws was an important factor for the capture of movement. However, the
demand related to proprioception has increased, differing from the freedom of movement
common to the handball modality. Handball is a team sport with open abilities, and the
analyzed tasks of this study were performed in close condition. Moreover, during the game,
throws are performed in the presence of teammates, opposition, and goalkeeper. Thus,
this study does not represent the throws during the game. However, our results could be
used to guide exercises, to train throws in a closed condition, such conditions that might
add improvements to the performance of amateur players.
CONCLUSION
It was concluded that amateur handball players adjusted the throws according to
the demands of accuracy and speed, and most of the variables presented greater values
in the throw with a focus on speed. The specific training of this sport action in handball
may have influenced the performance of the players in this specific action of the throw.
Despite this, some aspects found in the throw with a focus on speed stand out, such as the
preparatory adjustments, the dissociation between the shoulder and pelvic girdle during
the task, final angulation of the elbow, and the transfer of energy from the beginning to the
cocking phase.
BJMB! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Research Article!
Brazilian(Journal(of(Motor(Behavior!
Ribeiro et al.
2021
VOL.15
N.2
135 of 136
REFERENCES
1. Hespanhol Junior LC, Girotto N, Alencar TN, Lopes AD. Principais gestos esportivos
executados por jogadores de handebol. Rev Bras Cienc Esporte. 2012;34(3):727-739.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0101-32892012000300014
2. Wagner H, Pfusterschmied J, von Duvillard SP, Müller E. Performance and kinematics of
various throwing techniques in team-handball. J Sport Sci Med. 2011;10(1):73-80.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3737895/
3. Van den Tillaar R, Ettema G. Influence of instruction on velocity and accuracy of overarm
throwing. Percept Mot Skills. 2003;96(2):423-434. 10.2466/PMS.97.7.731-742
4. Karadenizli ZI. Inal HS. Meriç B. Aydin M. Bulgan C. Accuracy and velocity of the elite
female Turkish handball players. Int J Sports Sci. 2014;4(1):21-26.
10.5923/j.sports.20140401.04
5. Van den Tillaar R, Ettema G. Instructions emphasizing velocity, accuracy, or both in
performance and kinematics of overarm throwing by experienced team handball players.
Percept Mot Skills. 2003;97(3):731-742. 10.2466/pms.2003.97.3.731
6. Wassinger CA, Sole G, Osborne H. The role of experimentally-induced subacromial pain
on shoulder strength and throwing accuracy. Man Ther. 2012;17(5):411-415.
10.1016/j.math.2012.03.008
7. Kuhn JE. Throwing, the Shoulder, and Human Evolution. Am J Orthop. 2016;45(3):110-
114. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26991561/
8. Perone S, Simmering VR. Applications of dynamic systems theory to cognition and
development: new frontiers. Adv Child Dev Behav. 2017;52:43-80.
https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.acdb.2016.10.002
9. Carratú S, Mazzitelli C, Xavier GF, Sá CSC. Aquisição, Retenção e Transferências de
Habilidades Motoras em Crianças Hemiparéticas. Rev Neurocienc. 2012;20(3):360-366.
https://doi.org/10.34024/rnc.2012.v20.8247
10. Paes PP, Gantois P, Oliveira GTA, Batista GR, Costa MC, Fortes LS. Estímulos verbais e
musicais promovem maior desempenho no teste de 1rm em mulheres recreacionais no
treinamento de força? Rev Bras Cienc Mov. 2019;27(3):67-75.
http://dx.doi.org/10.31501/rbcm.v27i3.10010
11. Nascimento LR, Caetano LCG, Freitas DCMA, Morais TM, Polese JC, Teixeira-Salmela LF.
Diferentes instruções durante teste de velocidade de marcha determinam aumento
significativo na velocidade máxima de indivíduos com hemiparesia crônica. Braz J Phys
Ther. 2012;16(2):122-127. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-35552012005000008.
12. McGuinnis PM. Biomecânica do Esporte e Exercício. 3th ed. Porto Alegre, RS: Artmed;
2002. 448 p.
13. Okuno E, Fratin L. Desvendando a física do corpo humano: Biomecânica. 2nd ed. Barueri,
SP: Manole; 2017. 224 p.
BJMB! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Research Article!
Brazilian(Journal(of(Motor(Behavior!
Ribeiro et al.
2021
VOL.15
N.2
136 of 136
14. Carvalho RP, Tudella E, Savelsbergh GJP. Spatio-temporal parameters in infant's
reaching movements are influenced by body orientation. Infant Behav Dev. 2007;30(1):26-
35. 10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.07.006
15. Van den Tillaar R, Zondag A, Cabri J. Comparing performance and kinematics of throwing
with a circular and whip-like wind up by experienced handball players. Scand J Med Sci
Sports. 2013;23(6):373-380. 10.1111/sms.12091
16. Van den Tillaar R, Cabri J. Gender differences in the kinematics and ball velocity of
overarm throwing in elite team handball players. J Sports Sci. 2012;30(8):807-813.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2012.671529
17. Van den Tillaar R, Ettema G. Is there a proximal-to-distal sequence in overarm throwing in
team handball? J Sports Sci. 2009;27(9):949–955.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640410902960502
18. Wagner H, Pfusterschmied J, von Duvillard SP, Müller E. Skill-dependent proximal-to-distal
sequence in team-handball throwing. J Sports Sci. 2012;30(1):21–29.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2011.617773
19. Wagner H, Pfusterschmied J, Tilp M, Landlinger J, von Duvillard SP, Müller E. Upper-body
kinematics in team-handball throw. tennis serve. and volleyball spike. Scand J Med Sci
Sports. 2014;24(1):345–354. 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2012.01503.x
Citation: Ribeiro GA, Spinola PHBF, Tucci HT, Carvalho RP. Manipulation of Task Constraints on Throwing of
Amateur Handball Athletes. BJMB. 2021. 15(2): 127-136.
Editors: Dr Fabio Augusto Barbieri - São Paulo State University (UNESP), Bauru, SP, Brazil; Dr José Angelo Barela -
São Paulo State University (UNESP), Rio Claro, SP, Brazil; Dr Natalia Madalena Rinaldi - Federal University of
Espírito Santo (UFES), Vitória, ES, Brazil.
Copyright:© 2021 Ribeiro, Spinola, Tucci and Carvalho and BJMB. This is an open-access article distributed under
the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International License which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are
credited.
Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-
profit sectors.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
DOI:!https://doi.org/10.20338/bjmb.v15i2.198